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
--Mark Hahn, <hahn@neurocog.lrdc.pitt.edu>
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Gotta have a plan ... (Score:2)
The Aegis software management tool has been around for a long time [wikipedia.org], but I strongly suspect that part of the reason it never became very popular is because it enforced a particular belief on users. For example, your code is always in one of multiple stages and for the "being developed" state, you cannot check in unless you have new tests and your code must pass those tests. There are numerous other states and numerous other preconditions which developers much satisfy before they can move the code to the n
Re:Gotta have a plan ... (Score:2)
We've never insisted on a plan, you just had to explicitly say that you didn't have one.
What I'm seeing now is the opposite, you (and others) seem to be actively encouraging people to NOT use plans. Or at least, that is the impression I get.
People have never HAD to use DBI placeholders either, but the default documentation comprehensively refers to it.
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Not using DBI placeholders is far more serious than not using a plan. It's can leave you wide open to serious security holes. Lack of a plan, however, while risky, is far less risky.
When I'm moving, my friends and I are carrying stuff into my house and I leave the door unlocked. I lock the door when I'm done. Similarly, when I write tests, I set them as no_plan and add the plan when I'm done. What I want to do is minimize the accounting when writing tests and when the developer is done, they lock the d