Okay, I've searched around a bit and am having trouble finding what I want. I remember a while back there was a web site where you could type in a line or two or twenty of perl, and it would just go over it and make sure the syntax was correct. It would just check to see if brackets and parens were properly matched and stuff like that, no attempt to interpret or compile the code. You could paste in something like

and it would flag any blatant errors.

Am I dreaming, or is something like this still around? I've not been an active sys admin for over 15 years, so I am certainly out of the loop. I'm trying to keep some old Namazu and MHarc based searchable email archives working as best I can.

http://autox.team.net/archive


Thanks for any help.

mjb.

Do you mean Execute Perl Online?

Don't know about such a site, but I personally use a context-sensitive editor/IDE. KDevelop is the one I prefer, but Anjuta is another. Both will 'color code' your source, and if there's a problem it'll highlight. In KDevelop, it can even auto-complete parens/brackets (if you enable it), so you always have a trailing one. That said, it will also highlight a different color if you DON'T have a matching bracket, and show you both.

This may work for you, though
https://services.w3.org/yacker/uploads/perl?lang=perl
http://perlcritic.com/

I have always checked syntax with
perl -c

yes, there was a statement (actually about syntax highlighting of perl): only perl can correctly parse the perl code.

Okay, an actual example of what I have happening. The Namazu script to generate indices returns this, in part, for some of the email lists:

And I also get this:

So perl claims it is correct, and perl claims it is incorrect. Which is why I am looking for something other than 'perl -c'


mjb.

ps:

Use CODE tags when posting.

What you received was a warning, added in Perl 5.20. The code is technically CORRECT, and will compile and run...but it's telling you that you're doing something pointless.
https://github.com/Perl/perl5/issues/8899

Much the same as using STRICT will cause some code not to work, and removing the strict qualifier will let it work...it's just ignoring minor problems and/or best practices, in favor of things functioning.

No, perl claims it is useless. That means:
the ? after the red part is useless, that has no any effect. Could be ignored/dropped. But accepted.
Actually {1,1} is pointless too, but need to see more to be sure about that.

1 members found this post helpful.