* James E Keenan via RT <perlbug-followup@perl.org> [2014-10-11 03:50]: > On Fri Oct 10 00:25:37 2014, shlomif@shlomifish.org wrote: > > * https://github.com/shlomif/perl/tree/shlomif-perlipc-changes > > While I personally like the revisions you present in your second > patch, I know that our contributors have a range of opinions such > changes. So I'm going to request additional eyeballs before applying. I have some quibbles with all of the individual edits, but there is only one I really disagree with. > - #!/usr/bin/perl -w > + #!/usr/bin/perl > + > + use strict; > + use warnings; Yes. And I rather like that there was already a shebang with -w so that we can skip the “it’s distracting to add `use strict; use warnings;` to every example” convo this time. > - $| = 1; > + STDOUT->autoflush(1); This is always debatable to me in a small program… as it automagically loads a fairly heavy module under the covers just so one can spell one single assignment to one of the most commonly seen punctuation variables with a rather verbose name. For this case I call “they’ll need to know what $| is in their Perl programming life anyway” and oppose the edit. > - use File::Spec::Functions; > + use File::Spec::Functions (qw(catfile)); Yes, good. But why the extra parens? > - while (++$count) { > + while (1) { > + ++$count; > sleep 2; > print "$count\n"; > } Definitely. Though I would propose cutting the line count back down by doing this instead: - while (++$count) { + while (1) { sleep 2; - print "$count\n"; + print ++$count, "\n"; } (Just goes to show, you really needn’t obfuscate in order to be concise. In fact this is both more obvious *and* more concise.) --Thread Previous | Thread Next