http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=999474


in reply to Re: 78/80 chars perl line still a meaningful rule
in thread 78/80 chars perl line still a meaningful rule

Good morning,

thank you for looking at your code.

One thing I'm really intersted in is how would the others break up and concatenate these long "confess-strings" if they don't want to violate the 80cpl rule?

Best regards
McA

  • Comment on Re^2: 78/80 chars perl line still a meaningful rule

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: 78/80 chars perl line still a meaningful rule
by Anonymous Monk on Oct 17, 2012 at 08:11 UTC

    perltidy does 

    confess
    "Insufficent data in X from {hash lookup} through {hash lookup} so
+urce data file {hash lookup}"
    unless $condition;

    [download]
    which seems reasonable, although these days I prefer "condition or" to "unless" 
    $condition
  or confess
"Insufficent data in X from {hash lookup} through {hash lookup} source
+ data file {hash lookup}";

    [download]

    I've tried my hand at concatenation 

    $condition
    or confess "Insufficent data in X from {hash lookup} "
    . "through {hash lookup} source data file {hash lookup}";

    [download]
    And I it is pleasing to the eye, but I wouldn't do that by hand typing (editor IDE should handle it automagically). This also makes searching source code slightly more keyboard clicks but its not a deal breaker for me.

    I also like 

    $condition
  or confessn "Insufficent data in X from {hash lookup}
through {hash lookup} source data file {hash lookup}";

    [download]
    where confessn would do some newline squashing

    But mostly I just let it go past 80 chars cause is the least hassle and works with all editors :)

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

      Is it only me, but I think personally that the perltidy solution looks really ugly. The manual splitting looks best in my eyes, but exactly this is cumbersome.

      Better solutions desired... ;-)

      Best regards
      McA

[reply]
Re^3: 78/80 chars perl line still a meaningful rule
by Anonymous Monk on Oct 17, 2012 at 09:32 UTC 
    # Given.
confess "Insufficent data in X from {hash lookup} through {hash lookup
+} source data file {hash lookup}" unless {condition};

    [download]

    I prefer sprintf when there are more than 1 or 2 simple variables are involved. Using sprintf sans () with post condition check is awkward, so used or. I would use map or hash slice if the 3 instances refer to the same hash (reference). First argument to sprintf would be on single line. 

    {condition} or
  confess sprintf "Insufficient data in X from %s through %s source da
+ta file %s"
  , {hash lookup}
  , {hash lookup}
  , {hash lookup} ;

    [download]
[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
      I would have split the long text-string into two more convenient strings, concatenated together, and put the "unless" on a separate line, with each subsequent line neatly-indented from the first. I would particularly want to be sure that the presence of the "unless" line was not missed. I might for that reason say "unless (condition) { ... confess ... }" to make this important point all the more obvious to the reader. Being "obvious" is essential.
[reply]
Re^3: 78/80 chars perl line still a meaningful rule (,)
by tye (Sage) on Oct 17, 2012 at 13:37 UTC

    For 'confess', it is trivial: 

     % perl -MCarp=confess -e"confess 'this ', 'is split'"
this is split at -e line 1

    [download]

    If it isn't something that can deal with a list of strings, then I use join the vast majority of the time (because '.' has lousy precedence for such, 'sprintf' quickly leads to action-at-a-distance, '<<' can't be sanely indented, etc.).

    - tye        

[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Meditations