2

Let's say I have this dummy Perl package in test.pm:

package test;

use strict;
use warnings;

=head1 DESCRIPTION

=head2 env

Return the environment name.

=cut

sub env { return "environment name"; }

=head2 hst

Return the history file name.

=cut

sub hst { return "history file"; }

=head2 hst_dir

Return the directory containing the history file.

=cut

sub hst_dir { return "history directory"; }

1;

Then, I run a spell check from command line using Test::Spelling...

$ perl -MTest::More -MTest::Spelling \
> -e 'pod_file_spelling_ok("test.pm", "spell check"); done_testing;'

..., and my function names env and hst are marked as a typos, but hst_dir is accepted:

not ok 1 - spell check
#   Failed test 'spell check'
#   at -e line 1.
# Errors:
#     env
#     hst
1..1
# Looks like you failed 1 test of 1.

I know I can list a custom dictionary with add_stopwords(), but in my opinion function names should not be spell-checked at all.

Did I miss some fine-print in the documentation?

Jonas
  • 121,568
  • 97
  • 310
  • 388
battery
  • 511
  • 2
  • 8
  • There are times where spell checking of function names and variable names would have been nice. Once upon a time I had to maintain code where "survey" was misspelled in two different ways in method names. – pmakholm Sep 26 '12 at 13:39

1 Answers1

4

You're spell-cheking your POD, not your code.

Test::Spelling sees:

=head2 env
=head2 hst

How would it know that that are function names (not that it knows the concept of function names at all)?

It does see hst_dir as a perlish keyword, due to the underscore, whixh is not a normal character in a word. But that's as best it gets without stop words...

pavel
  • 3,488
  • 1
  • 20
  • 20
  • Thanks, I understand. I probably added `Pod::Coverage` into the mix in my mind, which makes the connection between `=headn`/`=item` lines and function names... My bad. – battery Sep 26 '12 at 11:43