Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl-Sensitive Sunglasses
 
PerlMonks  

Re^3: Five Common Misconceptions While Learning Perl

by revdiablo (Prior)
on Dec 01, 2005 at 23:34 UTC ( #513482=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^2: Five Common Misconceptions While Learning Perl
in thread Five Common Misconceptions While Learning Perl

Using modules is only worth it if you're good enough at Perl to debug the flaws in someone else's module

Extending that idea to code reuse in general, is using perl only "worth it" if you're "good enough" to debug flaws in that? What about an operating system? Or your computer's processor? Sure, all these things can and do contain bugs, but it's still very much "worth it" to use them.


Comment on Re^3: Five Common Misconceptions While Learning Perl
Re^4: Five Common Misconceptions While Learning Perl
by Anonymous Monk on Dec 02, 2005 at 20:31 UTC
    Extending that idea to code reuse in general, is using perl only "worth it" if you're "good enough" to debug flaws in that? What about an operating system? Or your computer's processor? Sure, all these things can and do contain bugs, but it's still very much "worth it" to use them.

    Not always, it's not.

    Diebold couldn't pitch a viable voting system based on Windows, because they couldn't prove all the failure modes.

    Any decently reviewed code will have the same issues: as a minimum, you need to audit all the failure modes for the hardware, OS, and modules, and fix them or deem them acceptable: otherwise, you have code that you MUST not sign off on.

    Advocating anything less is advocating lousy software engineering. An engineer MUST NOT sign off on sub-standard work, or he compromises his integrity, and the reputation of his entire profession. You can choose to accept or not accept a given piece component in your system, but only when what it does is well known, audited, and the risks of failure deemed acceptable.

      I would say voting systems have a higher standard than the majority of other applications. In that case, your point holds some water for me. For almost every other application, though, your standards strike me as extremely unrealistic. You're free to hold yourself to these rules, but using them as a measuring stick for others is going to lead to a lot of disappointment.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://513482]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others making s'mores by the fire in the courtyard of the Monastery: (9)
As of 2014-08-22 20:09 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    The best computer themed movie is:











    Results (164 votes), past polls