RE: RE: COBOL vs. Perl

[Ovid]

Ordinarily, yes. Unfortunately, the format of the input file depended heavily on the computer-illeterate users, so I had to do validation on the input and spit out error messages as appropriate.

The Moral of This Little Tale: Trust your users, not their input!

Update: I was going to correct my little spelling error, but I realized others might appreciate the irony of my mispelling "illiterate."

[gnat]

Absolutely right!

Something that I think gets lost in this mad rush to find the smallest most obscure code to solve a problem is that often you're sacrificing error-checking along the way. In the real world, I place much more emphasis on Doing the Right Thing than in brevity.

I applaud you for this. I wish more people followed your lead.

(Yes, I am a boring old fart :-)

[Anonymous Monk]

I must admit that there has been many a time that I've come up with some beautiful piece of code that does exactly what I want it to do in one line or two, and then I have to pollute it and expand it with all of the error checking conditions. Most annoying, but necessary. The approach that I take to my code is "Make things as simple as possible, but no simpler". In other words, brevity is good and worthwhile and whatnot, but as soon as you start sacrificing necessary functionality or readability, you're trying to make it too short and you need to slow down a little. Most of my code tends to be fairly readable as a result. :)