develooper Front page | | Postings from June 2008

Re: The uselessness of arbitrary Metric gaming

Thread Previous | Thread Next
David Cantrell
June 30, 2008 15:26
Re: The uselessness of arbitrary Metric gaming
Message ID:
chromatic wrote:
> On Monday 30 June 2008 15:03:14 David Cantrell wrote:
>> Surely you can at least check that all POD is "well-formed" without
>> running any code from the distribution in question?
> Sure, but that's a very different question from "Did the author write useful 
> documentation for everything that needs public documentation?"

which is why I said "at least".  I was under the impression that 
Aristotle was claiming either that you couldn't do that (which I 
believed to be incorrect, and I'm glad you can confirm that), or that 
even if you could it was useless on its own (which I also believe to be 

 >                                                         as "Are there
> any POD errors?" is statically determinable.  "What do useful, proper, 
> public, and everything mean?" is not.

I think that "POD is well-formed" is clearly a Good Thing To Measure, 
even if it falls short of being the perfect measure of POD, and should 
stay as part of CPANTS.  We're down to arguing about how to implement 
that check - whether it should be "ooh look, there's a t/pod.t file 
which says 'use Test::Pod'", or whether CPANTS should itself use 
Test::Pod to look for badly-formed POD.

I favour the latter, although I find that having the Evil Cargo-Culted 
t/pod.t in my distributions is rather useful for finding bugs before I 
release my code so I'm gonna continue using it.

David Cantrell | Godless Liberal Elitist

     It's my experience that neither users nor customers can articulate
     what it is they want, nor can they evaluate it when they see it
         -- Alan Cooper

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About