SPUG: Regexp::Assemble question

Croote, Rick rick.croote at philips.com
Wed Feb 25 12:48:52 PST 2009

I agree with Mark in that I found John's technical review to be excellent.  I did get a sense of tone, it would have better without the color comment in emails, and it took me awhile to get past that tone to review the rest of his comments honestly.  I do see the color in my email.

As always, we would all probably have written this differently, as Andrew stated, but John was bringing home a point that is typically a pet peeve of mine, code duplication, which in this case was kind of minor, but is all too often seen at much larger scales.

BTW, I do not know anyone other than I have met Andrew and have nothing but respect for what he has done for this group for years.   We are seeing a lot of "tone", in these few messages, and the scary part is that we all too often cannot read the actual "tone" in email.

Rick Croote<http://pww.directory.healthcare.philips.com/empl.asp?id=xADOxkTMwADM>
Software Development Engineer
Philips Healthcare - Ultrasound R&D

Work: 425.487.7834 Mobile: 425.346.6246
E-mail: rick.croote at philips.com<mailto:jeff.rahm at philips.com>

From: spug-list-bounces+rick.croote=philips.com at pm.org [mailto:spug-list-bounces+rick.croote=philips.com at pm.org] On Behalf Of Mark Mertel
Sent: 2009 Feb 25 9:21 AM
To: Andrew Sweger
Cc: spug-list at mail.pm.org
Subject: Re: SPUG: Regexp::Assemble question

Mr. Sweger,

I'm no expert, but it seems to me that Mr. Krahn's comments are all perfectly valid, and I can detect no ill intent, or slander towards the original poster. His are the types of comments to be expected during a professional code review. Were these directed at code I had written, I would welcome them rather than take them personally.

Mark Mertel

From: Andrew Sweger <andrew at sweger.net>
To: John W. Krahn <jwkrahn at shaw.ca>
Cc: SPUG <spug-list at mail.pm.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:55:13 AM
Subject: Re: SPUG: Regexp::Assemble question

On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, John W. Krahn wrote:

> Emails do not have colours, they are just plain text.

Mine doesn't. But I know some do. Regardless, Amit's intent was still

> Is this your actual code?  If so, you don't need the subroutines at all,
> you just need the keys.  And why use a hash reference instead of a hash?

Your tone suggests that all Perl programmers should use it in the same way
(your's aparently). Where I come from, Perl is spoken by people of every
skill level; from baby-perl-talk to uber-l33t-golpher-perl. If the code
works, it works. Style and convention mostly become a matter of teamwork.
This list is about learning and sharing Perl. I suspect you might not have
realized this (considering your reply to Amit and your previous reply to
this list).

> Why all the duplicate code?
>      my $mode = qx(file $filename) =~ /gzip/i ? '<:gzip' : '<';
>      open MYINPUTFILE, $mode, $filename or $Logger->logdie( "Error
> opening file: $!" );


> No need for this variable as Perl provides the $. built-in variable that
> keeps track of the current line number.

Maybe so, but $lines is a lot more obvious than $. when it comes time to
review or update the code. Perhaps $INPUT_LINE_NUMBER (via English.pm<http://english.pm/>)
could be even more obvious (and mean *exactly* the same thing as $.,
whereas $lines could actually mean something slightly different!).

> Those people who think they know everything are a great
> annoyance to those of us who do.        -- Isaac Asimov

Wow. Again?

Let me put it simply: knock it off. If you want to bash people about how
they write Perl, go hang out on Usenet or some obscure IRC channel. It's
not welcome here.

Andrew B. Sweger -- The great thing about multitasking is that several
                                things can go wrong at once.

Seattle Perl Users Group Mailing List
    POST TO: spug-list at pm.org<mailto:spug-list at pm.org>
SUBSCRIPTION: http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/spug-list
    MEETINGS: 3rd Tuesdays
    WEB PAGE: http://seattleperl.org/

The information contained in this message may be confidential and legally protected under applicable law. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.pm.org/pipermail/spug-list/attachments/20090225/41296d38/attachment.html>

More information about the spug-list mailing list