Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Problems? Is your data what you think it is?
 
PerlMonks  

Re^7: What is YOUR Development Process?

by dragonchild (Archbishop)
on Nov 08, 2005 at 20:27 UTC ( #506881=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^6: What is YOUR Development Process?
in thread What is YOUR Development Process?

I'd like to point you to a few posts I've made re: CGI::Application. Not all of every post is relevant to you, but it's good stuff, nonetheless. In no particular order ...

I don't think you're leveraging the greatest benefit of CGI::Application which is the parent class. Each of these different apps should have their own CGI::App child class, using a set of parent classes which would be shared across all your different apps. That's where the reuse comes in.


My criteria for good software:
  1. Does it work?
  2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?


Comment on Re^7: What is YOUR Development Process?
Re^8: What is YOUR Development Process?
by swiftone (Curate) on Nov 08, 2005 at 20:38 UTC
    I don't think you're leveraging the greatest benefit of CGI::Application which is the parent class.

    Actually, I'm leveraging it more than the average CGI::App user. I have a CGI::App subclass that manages my framework. If I have an app, say, a CRUD app to manage contact lists, it exists as a subclass of my framework class, and might have 5-10 instance scripts. Should I have a peculiar version, sure, i'll subclass it and have some particulars, for for a lot of apps only the templates and the names of some fields change. So I reuse the parent class. A lot. More than most CGI::App people, based on my questions in the past few years on that mailing list.

    I'm not clear on what you're suggesting that I'm not doing.

      You were mentioning that developer A produces version 1.0 of some C::A subclass for application Foo. Then, developer B comes along and upgrades that same C::A subclass to version 1.1 for application Bar. All of a sudden, application Foo doesn't work the same.

      To me, each application should have its own subclass, even if that class is nothing more than

      package Our::Web::Apps::Foo; use base 'Our::Web::Apps'; 1;
      If only to avoid the problem that you're discussing.

      My criteria for good software:
      1. Does it work?
      2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://506881]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others examining the Monastery: (8)
As of 2014-09-22 11:44 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    How do you remember the number of days in each month?











    Results (189 votes), past polls