|There's more than one way to do things|
Re^3: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01by stvn (Monsignor)
|on Jan 26, 2007 at 16:41 UTC||Need Help??|
Hmm, well that is one way to do it, but I am not sure it is a better way. IMO English.pm ends up just obscuring the more common "special" punctuation variables which any decent Perl hacker will already know by heart. Not to mention the fact that I REALLY DONT LIKE $SOURCE_CODE THAT @SHOUTS AT $ME ALL THE *TIME.
If those were double-quotes instead of single-quotes (which they probably were) then the warning was precisely correct.
Nope, they were not double quotes. My personal policy is to only use double quotes when interpolating, and single quotes otherwise (so that accidental interpolation is just not possible). This is why this one threw me, cause it just seems wrong.
Perl::Critic is lenient by default. Normally, it only reports the most severe issues (the relative severities are configurable). However, the web-service is currently configured for maximum strictness. I suppose I should loosen that up a bit. One of these days, I'd like to expose all the Perl::Critic configurations through the web-service, but that's a ways off.
I agree with xdg, a more lax policy on the webservice and/or the ability to select that more lax policy would certainly be a nice addition. If for no other reason then to demonstrate the power and flexibility of Perl::Critic.
Now please do not misinterpret me, I think Perl::Critic is a very important tool, and one which the community desperately needs. However nothing will turn people off more than 40-50 lines of pretty severe warnings only maybe 2-3 of which are actually valuable advice. A more lax policy (this is Perl after all) would likely help adoption even if it lets a few of TheDamian's edicts slip by.