Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Just another Perl shrine
 
PerlMonks  

Re^4: Truly randomized keys() in perl 5.17 - a challenge for testing?

by ikegami (Pope)
on Oct 05, 2013 at 01:02 UTC ( #1056972=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^3: Truly randomized keys() in perl 5.17 - a challenge for testing?
in thread Truly randomized keys() in perl 5.17 - a challenge for testing?

Why do you tell me this? I know all of that. Do you somehow think it contradicts what I said? Please reread the post to which you replied. It mentions neither performance nor making things more secure. It only mentions code simplification and maintaining the level of security.


Comment on Re^4: Truly randomized keys() in perl 5.17 - a challenge for testing?
Re^5: Truly randomized keys() in perl 5.17 - a challenge for testing?
by BrowserUk (Pope) on Oct 05, 2013 at 09:39 UTC
    Do you somehow think it contradicts what I said?

    You're not very good at this are you.

    1. "Code simplification."

      What is the justification for "simplifying" code that has worked perfectly well for a dozen or more releases?

      • Does is improve performance? No.
      • Does make things more secure? No.
      • Does it radically reduce compilation time? No.
      • Does it reduce the number of tests that are needed? No.
      • Does the simplification remove a dependency upon some external library or tool or exotic skillset? No.
    2. "maintaining the level of security"

      You mean, as far as its been considered, it probably didn't make things any worse.

    3. You omitted to mention: "broke a bunch of other people code for no good reason"

      A huge, resounding, emphatic: YES!

    Contradict? No.

    Show up for the pointless, meaningless, politically motivated, incomplete and non-useful diatribe it is. Abso-frickin-lutely.


    With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

      What is the justification for "simplifying" code that has worked perfectly well for a dozen or more releases?

      Maintainability and testability. Why else would you simplify code?

      You omitted to mention: "broke a bunch of other people code for no good reason"

      It didn't break any code. It made existing bugs occur more often. That's actually a good thing!

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1056972]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chanting in the Monastery: (13)
As of 2014-07-10 19:56 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    When choosing user names for websites, I prefer to use:








    Results (215 votes), past polls