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.
  • use warnings as a metric is unfair if a module expects to work with 5.005 or earlier. Likewise, having use warnings without a require 5.006 (or later) in Makefile.PL is probably a sign of poor kwalitee.

    • Hmm, you're right.

      So I guess I'll drop use warnings as a metric, and maybe add a combined use warnings && require 5.006 check.
      • This might be too much to do for every package, but I think checking for emitted warnings during tests might be a good metric. It's not perfect either, though. Still, good work :)
  • It seems the "use strict" test doesn't work out right for Business::ISMN.

    I'm curious how your system decides which modules to include: several of mine are missing, such as Chemistry::Elements, Apache::Htaccess, and Data::Constraint.

    The "use warning" metric is a bit unfair. Not only does it not work with perl versions prior to 5.6, but some people don't want warnings on in production code lest a perl upgrade start dumping new warnings into logs files. Before disks got to be as big as they are today, one
    • It seems the "use strict" test doesn't work out right for Business::ISMN.

      You're right. Business::ISMN contains two module files, but defines three namespaces, all of which use strict. The bug in CPANTS is that it expects the number of use stricts to be the same as the number of module files. Which is obviously wrong. I changed '==' to '

      I'm curious how your system decides which modules to include: several of mine are missing, such as Chemistry::Elements, Apache::Htaccess, and Data::Constraint.

      Hmm, str

  • I'm not sure exactly how to include it, but I think the CPAN ratings [perl.org] ought to be some sort of kwalitee indicator :-)