• The ++ denotation within the whitespace around operators seems without merit - This is because while the prefix and postfix increment operands perform the same task, their order differs and as such, depending on the code, are not stylistically interchangeable.

• The == denotation within the whitespace around operators is duplicated by the gt denotation because in fact, after all, == is just another equality test.

• The variable and sub names denotation is quite neat, although I think the parentheses for plurality is redundant if px would suffice (where x is the descriptor code to apply to scalars, hashes and arrays) - For example, Vp(s0h0a0) should be able to be reduced to Vp0.

Very nifty though ... Juerd++

I4 Os1 ;0 S,><.><+>**<=><&&><and><gt> B1
L1 C2 P2 N< R1 Vc1a2p(s0h0a0)r0d2 Hsw2T sub-main

Hrmmm, geek and style, is that a contradiction of terms in itself?

I like to think so ;)

* The ++ denotation within the whitespace around operators seems without merit

I knew I had to document it better (will do). It's just the difference between $foo++ and $foo ++ - choose any direction ;)

# The == denotation within the whitespace around operators is duplicated by the gt denotation because in fact, after all, == is just another equality test.

I separated them because I have seen someone consequently use "$foo > $bar" and "$foo==$bar"

* For example, Vp(s0h0a0) should be able to be reduced to Vp0.

Perhaps, but that would make the rules very complex, and I think that if someone's going to parse, a simple regex will have to be able to do the job ;)

U28geW91IGNhbiBhbGwgcm90MTMgY
W5kIHBhY2soKS4gQnV0IGRvIHlvdS
ByZWNvZ25pc2UgQmFzZTY0IHdoZW4
geW91IHNlZSBpdD8gIC0tIEp1ZXJk

Nice!

Before I give mine I had a couple of minor issues.. (heh you knew that was coming didnt you?)

• For the indenting im using It(=4c<!>) to mean that I use tabs, but have them set to be displayed as four spaces and that my editor automatically converts leading spaces to such tabs and it automatically truncates trailing spaces. Sorry if I didnt follow the code, hopefully you havent finished your parser for this yet ;-)
• For parens im using -0.5 because I use the minimum number of parens that keeps my codes meaning clear, but I dont try to explicitly avoid them.
• For references I used R1.5 because I often call vars "array_ref" or the like, but I dont put "ref" in anything like all variables references.
• Im using d0 for the dummy name question, assuming that "a" and "b" also includes safer var names like "i","j","x","y"
• I added the keyword "tidy" to your end block, because I rotuinely run my code through perltidy.

 
It(=4c<!>)Os1;0S,>.+**<=><&&><and><gt>++<==>B1L1
C2P-0.5N>eR2Vc1a1p(s0h0a0)r1.5d0Hsw1sub-main-tidy
[download]

It=4! Os1 ;0 S,>.+**<=><&&><and><gt>++<==> B1 L1 C2 
P-.5 N>e R2 Vl(en)c1a1p(s0h0a0)r1d.5 Hsw1 sub-main-tidy
[download]

BTW, two thoughts regarding perltidy, the first is that you might have a look there for even more options for a later version of the perl geek style code, and on the other hand wouldnt it be cool if you could feed this style blcok into perltidy and have it behave accordingly? Now theres a nifty little hack that you could do that would put your style code a touch above some of the other codes (at least in terms of practicality.)

Cheers Juerd, good post!

(heh you knew that was coming didnt you?)

I was afraid of that, yes :)

* For the indenting im using It(=4c<!>) to mean that I use tabs, but have them set to be displayed as four spaces and that my editor automatically converts leading spaces to such tabs and it automatically truncates trailing spaces.

I'll use just It=4!, meaning: "Indenting by tabs, but they are displayed as 4 columns of nothingness. I have my editor force (exclamation mark was stolen from vim) existing code to follow my style (convert spaces to tabs, in this case)". :)

# Sorry if I didnt follow the code, hopefully you havent finished your parser for this yet ;-)

I don't like parsing/parsed geek codes, so I will leave that up to someone else.

# For parens im using -0.5 because I use the minimum number of parens that keeps my codes meaning clear, but I dont try to explicitly avoid them. # For references I used R1.5 because I often call vars "array_ref" or the like, but I dont put "ref" in anything like all variables references.

Unlike with ++++ and ---, you can have floating point numbers. I like that idea. Will add :)

* I added the keyword "tidy" to your end block, because I rotuinely run my code through perltidy.

The end stuff was only to indicate order in a file, not programming order.

It(=4c<!>)Os1;0S,>.+**<=><&&<and><gt>++<==>B1L1 C2P-0.5N>eR2Vc1a1p(s0h0a0)r1.5d0Hsw1sub-main-tidy

Hmm, I really meant that whitespace to be in between items. But even that is a matter of style ;) Maybe sub-main is going to screw some parsers, but seeing your code, I'm glad I picked uppercased letters just before hitting submit :)

and on the other hand wouldnt it be cool if you could feed this style blcok into perltidy and have it behave accordingly?

That's just SICK, but a nice idea :)

Cheers jured, good post!

Thanks, but please s/jured/Juerd/ ;)

U28geW91IGNhbiBhbGwgcm90MTMgY
W5kIHBhY2soKS4gQnV0IGRvIHlvdS
ByZWNvZ25pc2UgQmFzZTY0IHdoZW4
geW91IHNlZSBpdD8gIC0tIEp1ZXJk

There is a perltidy user, so the link above does not work... try perltidy.sourceforge.net instead. There is a node that explains why there is a perltidy user.

-ben

I4 Os1 ;0 S,>.<?+?>**=<&&><and>++<gt><==> B1
L1 C1 P0 N> R1 Vl(de,en)c1a1p(s-1h0a0)r0d1 Hsw2 sub-main
[download]

It seems to me, that my style is currently changing. And some of it is due to emacs's indenting system. To the arraynaming: I often included liste (german for list) in my arraynames (and my variable names are often german).

So why not another option: l at variables with the language code after that for the naming. For me it would be Vlde.

update: Included l(de,en) in my code. (Yes, sometimes i use english names)

So why not another option: l at variables with the language code after that for the naming. For me it would be Vlde.

Great idea, but for the ease of reading I'll make parens required for that: Vl(en,nl) meaning "english most, dutch sometimes"

U28geW91IGNhbiBhbGwgcm90MTMgY
W5kIHBhY2soKS4gQnV0IGRvIHlvdS
ByZWNvZ25pc2UgQmFzZTY0IHdoZW4
geW91IHNlZSBpdD8gIC0tIEp1ZXJk

Question: how would I show that one rule (see below) trumps all other considerations? For example, my code fits in 80 columns. Always. No exceptions. Period.

So, could you add an item for column width? Perhaps:

80 - Width/Wrapping
How do you handle lines of more than 80 characters?

• 80! - There are no lines longer than 80 characters!
• 80? - Who knows? Just resize your window to see more.
• 80> - My editor can scroll, you luddite!
• 80+ - They wrap, just like you'd expect, what else?

• 80!!!! - Never, Never, Never > 80!
• 80!+ - Usually within 80 columns, but I don't mind some wrapping.
• 80!> - Usually within 80 columns, but just scroll to see the rest, sheesh.
• 80??? - Why would anyone even care about an archaic standard when you have a modern Emacs?

Then, how would I show that the 80 column rule trumps anything else (spaces may disappear to make it fit)?

juerd++

Russ
Brainbench 'Most Valuable Professional' for Perl

I2t! Os1 ;0 S,><.><+><**><=><&&><and>++<gt><==> B1
L1 C1 P0 N< R1 Vc1a1p(s-1h0a1)r1d1 Hsw2 main-sub
[download]

Update: Well as long as we're all being picky, it's a shame that I can't specify NO spaces around an operator. That's why I'm leaving out the ++ operator unless this gets clarified some more. Also, I'm choosing "dummy" variables even though these are more typically "temp".

buckaduck

it's a shame that I can't specify NO spaces around an operator.

You can!! Just have the operator without "<" or ">". Your code would be:


S,><.><+><**><=><&&><and>++<gt><==>
[download]

I'll add a bit of clarification to the root node

U28geW91IGNhbiBhbGwgcm90MTMgY
W5kIHBhY2soKS4gQnV0IGRvIHlvdS
ByZWNvZ25pc2UgQmFzZTY0IHdoZW4
geW91IHNlZSBpdD8gIC0tIEp1ZXJk

In your example, how do you distinguish between these?

++   <gt>
++<   gt>
[download]

Update: Apparently he does it by reading the specs more carefully than I did. My bad.

buckaduck

Fun idea! Here's mine:

It=8 Os1 ;0 S,><.><+>**<=><&&& gt;<and>++<gt><==>
B2 L1 C2 P-1 N> Vl(en)c1a1p(s0h0a0)r0d2 Hswl main-sub

This page is intentionally left justified.

• in a hash subscript
• left of the comma-like arrow

buckaduck

It=4 Os1 ;0 S,>.<+><**><=><&&><and>++<gt><==> B2 L1 C2
P2 N>e R1 Vl(en)c1a1p(s-1a1h1)r2d2 Hsw1a sub-{main}
[download]

• Tab is 4 spaces
• Spaces and newlines all over the shop, but not excessively so!
• Cuddly elses.
• Perl-y variables.
• Use strict warnings and diagnostics or die - although Diagnostics only during development
• Thanks to tye, main is a sub, tho' not for small scripts (less than 200-ish lines)

It On ;0 S,>.<+><**><=><&&><and>++><gt><==> B0 L1
C0 P-1 N< R1 Vc1a1p(s0h0a1)r0d1 Hsw2 main-sub
[download]

The only blatant thing I can see is in the P bit. What if you avoid parens where it makes the code look prettier or more logical? I don't avoid them with a vehemence, but I do care about them. For example, I always parenthesize remotely complicated things, and sub calls with more than one argument. Anyway, here's mine. I think it's not too odd.

It=4 Os1 ;0 S,><.><+><**><=><&&><and>++<gt><==> B1 L1 C2 P0 N>e R2
Vl(en)c1a1p(s0h0a1)r0d2 Hsw1 main-sub
[download]

<person>
<uniq><name>Drake Wilson</name><name>premchai21</name></uniq>
<ccode type="perlstylecode">
I4t! On ;02S,>.<+><**><=>&&<and>++<gt>== B0 L1 C0 P0 N>e R1
Vl(en)c3a12p0(ha)r0d0 Hsw1 main-sub|{main}-sub|main
</ccode>
</person>
[download]

Gripe: some items should be more "officially" multi-choosable; for instance, see the last item in my code. Also, floating-point numbers are not the best way to go about doing combinations I think; what about "somewhere between 1 and 3"? And, for instance, 1.5 tends to be read as biased towards 1.

I dunno, I kind of like the floating-point idea. You could even write a style-comparison metric which would treat a style block as a point in n-dimensional space, and measure the distance between two hackers' styles in the standard Pythagorean way.

Hell, you could even incorporate that into interviews if you were hiring people, to make sure you never hired someone whose style was radically different to your own ... any takers? ;-)

=cut
--Brent Dax
There is no sig.

I4t1 Os1 ;0 S,><.><+>**<=><&&><and>++<gt><==> B1 L1 C2
P1 N>e R-1 Vc1a1p(s-1h1a1)r0d2 Hsw2 sub-main
[download]

It=4 Os1 ;0 S,><.><+><**><=><&&><and>++><gt><==> B2 
L2 C2>0 P1 Ne R0 V1enc1>3a1p(s1h1a1)r0d1 Hsw2d?a main-sub
[download]

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
- Jim
Insert clever comment here...

This thing probably has too much momentum to change now, but I think it's regrettable that '>' and '<' were chosen to denote anything, since they have to be encoded in order to show up properly in webspace.

Of course, perhaps that's part of the fun ; )

..Jon