[sf-perl] Perl Standards / Perl Best Practices

[Fred Moyer]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Bob goolsby <bob.goolsby at gmail.com> wrote:
> Why yes I have; cover to cover; twice.
>
> There is a lot of Damian that I agree with, and there are some things
> that I don't.  We had an interesting hall-way track at PerlCon a
> couple of years ago.....

It is worth considering that Damian made a point of doing 256 best
practices (2**8).  So an indeterminate number of those may only be
there 'because'.

Some I think are critical (such as using bare returns from subs
instead of returning undefined), but others are window dressing.  In
my experience, I think there is a lot of good practices in there, but
trying to implement all of the practices in that book for a multiple
person development is insanity.  The overhead of debating the merits
of controversial practices is more harmful than the practices
themselves.


> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Earl Ruby <eruby at knowledgematters.net> wrote:
>> Have you read _Perl Best Practices_?
>>
>> Appendix A & B are a quick read, and give you a feel for the book's
>> contents: http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780596001735/preview
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Joe Brenner <doom at kzsu.stanford.edu> wrote:
>>> By the way... it seems to me that one major advantage of developing
>>> using a CPAN framework is that it's at least A Standard.  The perl world
>>> doesn't have a lot in the way of standard practices, and it's worth
>>> thinking about embracing what little we've got in that direction.
>>
>> --
>> Earl Ruby
>> http://earlruby.org/
>> _______________________________________________
>> SanFrancisco-pm mailing list
>> SanFrancisco-pm at pm.org
>> http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/sanfrancisco-pm
>>
>
>
>
> --
> B
>
> Bob Goolsby
> bob.goolsby at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> SanFrancisco-pm mailing list
> SanFrancisco-pm at pm.org
> http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/sanfrancisco-pm
>