Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from November 2011
On 11/30/2011 03:04 AM, Abigail wrote: > On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 02:25:27PM -0500, Mark Mielke wrote: >> I actually like the way the perldoc is written where it uses both. This >> apparent conflict raises the question which the reader can then answer >> for themselves rather than leaving the document with an untrue belief. > But now you aren't consistent. If you really think one should be concerned > what newbies think, you shouldn't not use foreach. After all, that may have > them thinking there is no foreach in the language, and then they encounter > foreach in someone elses code, they'll be utterly confused (and run of to > Python?) > > > (Yeah, I'm sarcastic here. It's just that I would like to point out that > the "oh, but think of the newbies" is such an utterly silly argument) Agree on the claim around inconsistency. The intent is not to be consistent. I expect the docs to be written for one group of people, but we as a design team may choose to adhere to a more specific set of rules. The docs should describe what is possible and any reader of the docs, including casual readers who don't really read, should be left with a good understanding of how things work. If a casual reader leaves the document believing that "foreach" is required to represent the list iteration, then the docs have probably not been successful and transmitting true understanding. Our code that we write as an isolated team, can be far more specific about which possibilities we choose to allow or which styles we choose to adhere to. Our goal is not to educate the masses. Our goal is to prevent such things as mass file changes just because one person in the group has a different style than everybody else. -- Mark Mielke<mark@mielke.cc>Thread Previous | Thread Next