NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
declining average quality of Perl LOC written (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
confirmation bias much ?
I think those who *do* care about quality have got on with it, that's why we have some seriously good tools for to help code quality, in every area from profiling, to perl critic to unit tests, to smarter refactoring editors : whether using perlisense or other tools inside vi or emacs, or using Padre, Kephra, Komodo or Eclipse.
I care about quality, and Perl has delivered, everything from 2 generations of ORM that beat anything available from other dynamic languages, to CPAN modules w
@JAPH = qw(Hacker Perl Another Just);
print reverse @JAPH;
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I suspect that most of what you see is due to the fact that Perl allows non-programmer biologists to get things done without having to be good programmers. No one's devised a system by which you can turn a non-programmer into someone with good code maintenance habits automagically. I'm not sure it's possible.
Re:declining average quality of Perl LOC written (Score:1)
To a degree, perhaps. I think it's more that it gives non-programmers the *illusion* that they are getting things done.
For example, they can write code like "while { print; }" and feel that their code works. Unfortunately, it fails silently on I/O errors, so to my way of thinking it's far worse than useless.
Given that there are alternatives that don't suffer from this problem, this seems like a showstopper to me.
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:1)
Have you ever noticed empty
catchblocks in Java code that trapException e? That's because non-programmers who just want to get something done care more about whipuptitude than handling all exceptional cases perfectly.I consider myself a decent programmer, and I don't check the results of my
closecalls all the time, either. Does that mean that my code only works in my illusion-prone mind?Re: (Score:1)
Hmm. If I usually don't buckle my kids into their seatbelts, would you say that I'm an inattentive parent (a) most of the time, or (b) only if/when I actually am involved in a wreck and they go the the hospital? I'd say (a).
I don't always check my results, either, but it's usually on my mind because I know it's important, and I generally try to make my stuff reliable before it leaves my hands.
Re: (Score:1)
If you have novice programmers writing programs where improper coding can produce death, dismemberment, and other disaster, you have incompetent management. (If that's not what you mean, then your analogy is inappropriate.)