Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
laziness, impatience, and hubris

Re^4: RFC: Tutorial: use strict; now what!?

by Xiong (Hermit)
on Feb 09, 2012 at 22:57 UTC ( #952874=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^3: RFC: Tutorial: use strict; now what!?
in thread RFC: Tutorial: use strict; now what!?

Oh, I hope I'm not calling anyone 'dumb'... or for that matter, any offensive term. The topic of this tutorial is very basic. There is no real way to say that without implying that the reader is uninformed. In my day we had swimming pools with sloped bottoms; swimming lessons started at the shallow end. Genes were not discussed.

Jack can stand intelligent but uninformed and request you to define your terms all day. 'Identifier' is jargon; a valid identifier in one language might not be so in another. I see fewer issues with 'word' although you may mean that, too, to have a precise meaning. If you would state precisely, in primitive terms only, what perl considers a bareword then I'll try to work that in. But remember, I'm much less interested in determining the exact bounds of the term than in suggesting a general direction for the newcomer to look.

Many programmers value precision highly; so do I. But I know I need to bend to the newcomer who has not yet learned that value. Some code will run (correctly or not) without strictures; and after adding strictures the same code does not run but instead shows an error. In a more pedantic expression, execution of the code terminates with a fatal exception. I feel I'm on quite solid ground to say that the newcomer has little tolerance for the fine distinction that, of two lines of error text, one was emitted by strict and the other by the interpreter itself under provocation.

I sense a burning desire to cram in as much information as possible; I resist this. I'm more inclined to cut and simplify; even at the risk of loss of precision. Sometimes worse is better.

I've said twice now that I intend to remove the lines:

- (SOME_ERROR_TEXT) at (FILE) line (LINE). - Execution of (FILE) aborted due to compilation errors.

My feeling is that I was wrong to use an abstraction; I now intend to show in that section the actual errors produced by the examples, by way of introduction. Since I also intend to rewrite the examples, this is not a ten-minute patch.

Unfortunately my alarm just this minute sounded, reminding me to hop in the shower and run out the door to pursue the grind. So I can't post the new draft today; I haven't finished it. Please accept my assurance that I won't post it until I've reviewed thoroughly all comments on the previous draft.

I'm not the guy you kill, I'm the guy you buy. —Michael Clayton

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: RFC: Tutorial: use strict; now what!?
by ikegami (Pope) on Feb 10, 2012 at 08:04 UTC

    I've said twice now that I intend to remove the lines

    Ah ok, I hadn't seen that. (In fact, I can't find it.)

    Please accept my assurance that I won't post it until I've reviewed thoroughly all comments on the previous draft.

    I didn't mean to imply any urgency?

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://952874]
[Corion]: Whoa! I haven't invoked Crunchy today! But thanks to Crunchy, it's Friday! ;)
[Corion]: A good morning to everybody ;)
[Discipulus]: regular as always.. good morning Corion
[Corion]: Hi Discipulus ;) A good morning to you :)

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others meditating upon the Monastery: (11)
As of 2017-01-20 07:54 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    Do you watch meteor showers?

    Results (173 votes). Check out past polls.