in reply to "Baby" Perl versus "Bad" Perl
Let's say you have two children. One is 8 and the other is 3. They both exhibit the same kinds of behavior - drawing on walls, throwing tantrums, willful disobedience, and the like. Which is bad and which is the baby?
My criteria for good software:
On one level, both are behaving badly and, as such, shouldn't be taken to a restaurant. However, that kind of behavior is expected for the 3yr old and not expected for the 8yr old. Why? Because the 8yr old is expected to have matured and (mostly) grown out of that phase. And that is the difference between "baby Perl" and "bad Perl." If you are a newbie, then your Perl is baby Perl. If you are a supposed expert (as all authors are supposed to be), then your Perl is bad Perl. Neither would be allowed on my boxes in a million years, but one is expected behavior and the other is not.
My criteria for good software:
- Does it work?
- Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^2: "Baby" Perl versus "Bad" Perl
by sauoq (Abbot) on Dec 04, 2005 at 23:09 UTC |
In Section
Meditations