Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
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

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • You're not being too critical. I expect to see such sloppy work out of CS students or new programmers, but it should never work it's way into the professional code.

    Now that's what I think. The reality is, I have funny notions about software design. I think that professional software should have a test suite, preferably one that can also run on the end-users system. Many would argue that point with me. Few would argue that a test suite is a bad idea, but many might argue that it's not necessary ("I don't write bugs" or "I test it thoroughly by hand"). Further, I've been told that using templates and writing tests is "overengineering."

    In a similar vein, I've had silly arguments with people who think that foreign key constraints and transactions aren't necessary because, as programmers, they want to have fine-grained control. They might be the sort who would argue that having a CSV list would mean one less join in the database and thus keep the schema simpler. How do you argue with "logic" like that?

    • A nice Louisville Slugger always helps.

    • Now that's what I think. The reality is, I have funny notions about software design. I think that professional software should have a test suite

      Test suites are not part of the "culture" everywhere. It appears to be a language-thing. Perl (as do other languages) come with frameworks to write tests. For other languages there appears to be no such standard. I've hardly ever seen a C library coming with a test suite. And the remarkable thing is: Most often they work splendidly. Maybe it's because a good C pro
    • Sorry but any IT gradudate should know normalisation. There is no excuse - any IT degree that doesn't cover the basics of normalisation (its not that hard, in fact once you've done a handful of exersizes you realize its pretty much common sense) is worthless.

      As for new programmers - again any course which teaches programming has to include some database design - name a single application since 1980 that didn't use some sort of database.

      --

      @JAPH = qw(Hacker Perl Another Just);
      print reverse @JAPH;
      • Sorry but any IT gradudate should know normalisation. There is no excuse - any IT degree that doesn't cover the basics of normalisation (its not that hard, in fact once you've done a handful of exersizes you realize its pretty much common sense) is worthless.
        I don't think I said anything about these people being graduates. I don't know for sure, but there seems to be no evidence to support that.
        • I know. The reply I replied to mentioned Graduates not knowing Normalisation which is pretty shocking.

          mind you I have worked with graduates who it seemed forgot how to normalise databases. (i.e. they did it in wierd quirky ways to work better with VB or just used too many or too few tables).

          --

          @JAPH = qw(Hacker Perl Another Just);
          print reverse @JAPH;
      • name a single application since 1980 that didn't use some sort of database.

        mysql <gd&r>