I think the policy in question is Perl::Critic::Policy::InputOutput::RequireBriefOpen. The POD describes the reason for the policy, some alternative coding styles and how to configure it differently. You can decide whether it applies to your case or not.

settles that! thanks

You're welcome. See also Sort and summarize perlcritic output, which makes it easy to access the POD for a given policy.

Surely I should not open the file write the text close the file to satisfy PerlCritic

No, you shouldn't. You should not do anything dumb in order to satisfy that dumb tool.

Please note, when I use the phrase "dumb tool", I mean that the tool itself is dumb, as in has no intelligence built in.

Using the tool is not dumb if you use it as it is intended to be used; which is to say you chose the policies that you find useful and use the tool to double check yourself.

Where it goes wrong is when people modify their code to "satisfy" policies that they obviously disagree with.

---

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

that's one for, one against

Perhaps this will swing it for you?

---

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Why not?

I close my log files often on the basis of it not requiring that much IO...
but providing safety of the information therein in case of unforseeable behavior of external components*.

Cheers, Sören

*) like databases running out of space, admins killing my processes and other havoc.

Why not?

Here's one reason:

cmpthese -1, {
    a=>q[ 
        open O, '>', 'log'; 
        for(1..10000){
            print O chr(0)x80;
        }
        close O;
    ],
    b=>q[
        for(1..10000){
            open O, '>>','log';
            print O chr(0)x80;
            close O;
        }
    ] 
};;
            (warning: too few iterations for a reliable count)

     s/iter      b      a
b      1.30     --   -99%
a 8.42e-003 15300%     --
[download]

A second reason is that the first consumes almost no resource; whereas the second consumes prodigious amounts of it.

The times before and after the first:

a  5.546|5.343|0|0
a  5.546|5.343|0|0
[download]

And the second:

b  5.578|5.343|0|0
b  5.734|6.375|0|0
[download]

Whether you are just impacting every other process on your local server; or being billed for all that addition CPU & IO when running your process in the cloud; incurring 1000's of times more resource use in order to satisfy a dumb tool that is easily silenced is .... Its your dollar, you pick the adjective.

---

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.