Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Syntactic Confectionery Delight
 
PerlMonks  

Re^3: Where are the Perl::Critic policies for the Camel? (the unthinking leading the unseasoned)

by tchrist (Pilgrim)
on Oct 06, 2013 at 15:49 UTC ( #1057161=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^2: Where are the Perl::Critic policies for the Camel? (the unthinking leading the unseasoned)
in thread Where are the Perl::Critic policies for the Camel?

Andy Lester graciously wrote:

Never mind automated linters, how many times have you seen this exchange?

“You should always use strict and warnings.”

“I used to have those but they caused a lot of errors and my code wouldn't run so I took them out.”

How many times have I seen that particular exchange, Andy? As many times as there are grains of sand in the sea! Especially if you count including -Wall in your Makefile’s CCFLAGS.

But I can top that. I’ve actually seen this, and not just once, either:

Manager: “We can’t have any more coredumps from our C programs. It makes us look bad and interferes with production.”

Programmer: signal(SIGSEGV, SIG_IGN);

I dearly wish I were kidding; I’m not.

I see stuff like this every day, stuff that doesn’t so much move you to righteous ranting as it does to being stricken dumb with sheer disbelief. I bet I now have keyboard-shaped wedges permanently imprinted on my forehead.

It’s code that leads first to apoplexy and thence to syncope. The thing is, after they bring around the code-smelling salts and still dazed you awaken from your nightmare, it’s all still there: holy terrors of truly Biblical proportion.

And by Biblical, I’m specifically thinking of the venerable Books of Job and of Lamentations and of Ecclesiastes: no Good News to be found. :)

We’re well into sackcloth-and-ashes territory here.


“Weeping may endure for an entire dark release, but joy cometh in the fresh light of refactoring.”

― Psalms 30:5, the Programmers’ edition

  • Comment on Re^3: Where are the Perl::Critic policies for the Camel? (the unthinking leading the unseasoned)

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1057161]
help
Chatterbox?
[Discipulus]: i propend for removing: why? because we are so few that we must find i minimal common divisor, this is certainly Perl not our (anyway private) thougths. And i say this still wondering because i love a lot freedom of expression. And i say this not for roho
[1nickt]: Discipulus that was the point of my story of taking the sticker off my truck. I know there are lots of people in the world who if I knw their private beliefs I might want to argue with them. And they with me. But life cannot all be arguments!
[1nickt]: This is less than perfect ... but demanding perfection (from people or from life) is a sure way to unhappiness.
[Discipulus]: and anyway we have CB where every (democratic) opinion can be expressed
erix eat the rich!
[1nickt]: I do think it is sad that roho has received 3 downvotes for his polite request, as did I when I objected to the profanity in stonecolddevin's sig. I upvoted both him and Karl for the discussion. Way too much downvoting for inappropriate reasons here!
Discipulus learn that 'argue' has a little negative sense, he thought was a neutral sense, 'vox media'
[1nickt]: argue == discuss && argue == be contentious
[Discipulus]: you are right 1nickt i didnt voted nor downvoted; I just upvote perl content i like
[1nickt]: In Spanish, to argue (like a fight) is discutir -- does not mean to discuss !

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others about the Monastery: (7)
As of 2017-06-22 12:18 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    How many monitors do you use while coding?















    Results (519 votes). Check out past polls.