Re^2: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01

in reply to Re: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01
in thread Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01

The magic punctuatinon it is talking about is $@ without which I could not really catch exceptions

use English qw(-no_match_vars);
eval { die 'A horrible death' };
print "Something died\n" if $EVAL_ERROR;
[download]

Useless interpolation of literal string at line ...
I don't even get that one because the line in question is basically something like this:
confess 'Some error happened because ' . $obj->foo . ' blew up';
[download]
I would have to say that this string was far from useless.

If those were double-quotes instead of single-quotes (which they probably were) then the warning was precisely correct.

sub mumble_path { join ", " => split '/' => (shift)>get_path }
[download]

I would argue that adding return to something like that would be just adding noise.

You certainly can argue! Perl-Critic-Lax is a suite of slightly more forgiving versions of several Policies. Perhaps you could write a new module for it.

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.

-Jeff

Comment on Re^2: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01 Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01 by xdg (Monsignor) on Jan 26, 2007 at 15:13 UTC
However, the web-service is currently configured for maximum strictness. I suppose I should loosen that up a bit. I suspect you'll get more positive reactions if you tune the level of strictness for what you think "typical" (hah!) programmers would find helpful. Not everyone takes PBP as gospel. Alternatively, even if you don't expose all the configuration via the service, perhaps either having two options "Analyze my code aggressively" or "Analyze my code mildly" would help. Or perhaps just grouping the output in descending order of severity -- so people see the highest severity issues first and then can decide where to stop paying attention. -xdg Code written by xdg and posted on PerlMonks is public domain. It is provided as is with no warranties, express or implied, of any kind. Posted code may not have been tested. Use of posted code is at your own risk.	[reply]
Re^4: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01 by educated_foo (Vicar) on Jan 28, 2007 at 18:30 UTC
Agreed! I tried out the web version on one of my modules, and instantly dismissed it as (1) needless pedantry, (2) uninformative, and (3) pimping PBP: `Code is not tidy at line 1, column 1. See page 33 of PBP. Severity: +1` [download] Subsequent lines did not improve my opinion of the module.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01 by stvn (Monsignor) on Jan 26, 2007 at 16:41 UTC
`use English qw(-no_match_vars); eval { die 'A horrible death' }; print "Something died\n" if $EVAL_ERROR;` [download] 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. -stvn	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01 by Herkum (Parson) on Jan 26, 2007 at 18:08 UTC
I can understand not wanting the code to shout. However, when you are working with special system variables. They are so compact and non-descriptive they can be problematic to identify and debug. Imagine looking at $/ and meaning to use $\, talk about subtle. English may have code that SHOUTS but it brings attention to itself with the upper-case syntax and is more descriptive than the built-in variable names. There are good reasons why TheDamian recommended its use in PBP.	[reply]
Re^5: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01 by xdg (Monsignor) on Jan 26, 2007 at 18:43 UTC
Imagine looking at $/ and meaning to use $\, talk about subtle I used to have trouble remembering these until I read somewhere about thinking about them like funnels -- just mentally remove the "S" from the "$". `\|/ is a funnel in ($/) \|\ is a funnel out ($\)` [download] That doesn't change your point about subtle -- it's just the mnemonic I picked up somewhere. -xdg Code written by xdg and posted on PerlMonks is public domain. It is provided as is with no warranties, express or implied, of any kind. Posted code may not have been tested. Use of posted code is at your own risk.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^5: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01 by stvn (Monsignor) on Jan 26, 2007 at 21:56 UTC
However, when you are working with special system variables. They are so compact and non-descriptive they can be problematic to identify and debug. Imagine looking at $/ and meaning to use $\, talk about subtle. I suppose a lot of this really depends on how oftern you need to use special punctuation vars. Most of my $work code (medium-large web app) I never use anything other than $@. And the longer version of this (IMHO of course) is just overkill. English may have code that SHOUTS but it brings attention to itself with the upper-case syntax and is more descriptive than the built-in variable names. I can understand wanting to bring attention to certain usages of these variables, but not all. With more common variables and usages (like $@) it ends up being a distraction to the visual flow of the code, and drawing attention to an "exceptional" case. -stvn	[reply]
Re^3: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01 by jdporter (Paladin) on Jan 26, 2007 at 18:50 UTC
`confess 'Some error happened because ' . $obj->foo . ' blew up';` [download] If those were double-quotes instead of single-quotes (which they probably were) then the warning was precisely correct. No, that can't be it, because the strings in question contain none of the things Critic cares about, namely `unescaped $. or @.` and `escaped metachars`. I suspect that your parser is not detecting the fact that the `confess` argument is actually three strings concantenated together, and it's thinking the `$obj` is inside the string. Anyway, I can't verify any of the above, since I can't get the `confess` line to trigger a warning from the web-based Critic now. A word spoken in Mind will reach its own level, in the objective world, by its own weight	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01 by shmem (Chancellor) on Jan 27, 2007 at 00:43 UTC
update: I overlooked the `-no_match_vars` (ETOOMUCHNOISE? :-), the impact of `use English` isn't that nefarious in the advised usage. But even so, I stand to my statement. jthalhammer, The magic punctuatinon it is talking about is $@ without which I could not really catch exceptions `use English qw(-no_match_vars); eval { die 'A horrible death' }; print "Something died\n" if $EVAL_ERROR;` [download] Please go read perlvar. I include the relevant bits here: BUGS Due to an unfortunate accident of Perl's implementation, "use English" imposes a considerable performance penalty on all regular expression matches in a program, regardless of whether they occur in the scope of "use English". For that reason, saying "use English" in libraries is strongly discouraged. See the Devel::SawAmpersand module documentation from CPAN ( http://www.cpan.org/modules/by-module/Devel/ ) for more information. Suggesting `use English` to avoid the use of `$@` is just plain silly --shmem _($_=" "x(1<<5)."?\n".q·/)Oo. G°\ / /\_¯/(q / ---------------------------- \__(m.====·.(_("always off the crowd"))."· ");sub _{s./.($e="'Itrs `mnsgdq Gdbj O`qkdq")=~y/"-y/#-z/;$e.e && print}	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Module Announcement: Perl-Critic-1.01 by jettero (Monsignor) on Jan 27, 2007 at 03:35 UTC
I dislike English, but it does say: use English qw( -no_match_vars ) ; # Avoids regex performance penalty. Nobody fixed the perlvar page maybe? -Paul	[reply]

In Section Meditations