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

Re: RFC: "Best Practices" code review section

by davidrw (Prior)
on Aug 04, 2005 at 14:02 UTC ( [id://480968]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

This is an archived low-energy page for bots and other anonmyous visitors. Please sign up if you are a human and want to interact.


in reply to RFC: "Best Practices" code review section

The idea is that the code already works - i.e. not SoPW material -, is very much NOT obfuscated and might even be very UNCOOL, i.e. accountancy software.
But that's perfectly ok to post in SOPW, right? I've gotten the impression (i swore a higher monk mentioned it in a reply not too long ago--something along the lines of "ask for review in SOPW to get it finalized/touched up before submitting to Snippets" or something like that) that code review requests should go to SOPW (as opposed to Snippets or Meditations)... Which seems to make sense if you consider the question to be of the form "I have this working code that does ___ -- what 'better' or different way would you do it?".
  • Comment on Re: RFC: "Best Practices" code review section

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://480968]
help
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Notices?
    hippoepoptai's answer Re: how do I set a cookie and redirect was blessed by hippo!
    erzuuliAnonymous Monks are no longer allowed to use Super Search, due to an excessive use of this resource by robots.