Bug 15871: Improve PerlCritic level for t/RecordProcessor.t

 Bug 15871: Improve PerlCritic level for t/RecordProcessor.t

perlcritic -5 failed.
Attempt to clean up to a higher level:
-- use English to address use of $@ variable
-- perltidy on the code
-- substitute q{} for ''
-- expand out single line hacky goodness (... s/\.pm$//) to more code
-- remove parenthesis on functions that don't need it
-- add x, s, and m as needed to regexps
-- change double quotes to single quotes where no variable involved
-- tweaked eval destroy test to check return value and use $EVAL_ERROR
-- renamed $processor to $record_processor in the subtest to avoid
   lexical warnings

TEST PLAN
---------

$ perlcritic -5 t/RecordProcessor.t
Don't modify $_ in list functions at line 43, column 25.  See page 114 of PBP.  (Severity: 5)

$ perlcritic -2 t/RecordProcessor.t
No package-scoped "$VERSION" variable found at line 1, column 1.  See page 404 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Quotes used with a string containing no non-whitespace characters at line 34, column 36.  See page 53 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Quotes used with a string containing no non-whitespace characters at line 34, column 39.  See page 53 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Quotes used with a string containing no non-whitespace characters at line 36, column 33.  See page 53 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Quotes used with a string containing no non-whitespace characters at line 36, column 36.  See page 53 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Don't modify $_ in list functions at line 43, column 25.  See page 114 of PBP.  (Severity: 5)
Regular expression without "/s" flag at line 43, column 33.  See pages 240,241 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Regular expression without "/x" flag at line 43, column 33.  See page 236 of PBP.  (Severity: 3)
Regular expression without "/m" flag at line 43, column 33.  See page 237 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Regular expression without "/s" flag at line 43, column 66.  See pages 240,241 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Regular expression without "/x" flag at line 43, column 66.  See page 236 of PBP.  (Severity: 3)
Regular expression without "/m" flag at line 43, column 66.  See page 237 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Expression form of "grep" at line 47, column 8.  See page 169 of PBP.  (Severity: 4)
Expression form of "grep" at line 50, column 20.  See page 169 of PBP.  (Severity: 4)
Regular expression without "/s" flag at line 50, column 26.  See pages 240,241 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Regular expression without "/m" flag at line 50, column 26.  See page 237 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Return value of eval not tested at line 73, column 1.  You can't depend upon the value of $@/$EVAL_ERROR to tell whether an eval failed.  (Severity: 3)
Magic punctuation variable $@ used at line 78, column 5.  See page 79 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Reused variable name in lexical scope: $processor at line 84, column 5.  Invent unique variable names.  (Severity: 3)
Subroutine "new" called using indirect syntax at line 87, column 18.  See page 349 of PBP.  (Severity: 4)
Subroutine "new" called using indirect syntax at line 93, column 18.  See page 349 of PBP.  (Severity: 4)
Quotes used with a string containing no non-whitespace characters at line 96, column 40.  See page 53 of PBP.  (Severity: 2)
Subroutine "new" called using indirect syntax at line 99, column 18.  See page 349 of PBP.  (Severity: 4)
Subroutine "new" called using indirect syntax at line 106, column 18.  See page 349 of PBP.  (Severity: 4)
$ prove -v t/RecordProcessor.t
t/RecordProcessor.t .. ok
All tests successful.
Files=1, Tests=13,  0 wallclock secs ( 0.01 usr  0.00 sys +  0.22 cusr  0.02 csys =  0.25 CPU)
Result: PASS

$ prove -v t/RecordProcessor.t
...
$ git bz apply 15871

Repeat perlcritic level 2, and only $VERSION warning should exist.
Retest with the prove.
Run koha qa test tools.

Signed-off-by: Hector Castro <hector.hecaxmmx@gmail.com>
Works as advertised

Signed-off-by: Jesse Maseto <jesse@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@unc.edu.ar>
I don't really care about perlcritic as long as it involves changing '' into qw{} (WTF?)
Anyway, I'd do this kind of things as we go, for example, if we were adding more tests. In that
case it would just be a followup for this, after you provided a patch for an enh/bugfix.

Signed-off-by: Brendan A Gallagher <brendan@bywatersolutions.com>