in reply to Re: Coding style: truth of variable name (subroutine length)
in thread Coding style: truth of variable name

My subroutines can range from just a few lines to over several hundred lines long. Labelled blocks sometimes help in making long subroutine clearer, as well as creating lexical scope to isolate the effect of variables. 

sub do_some_task {
    my ($arg1, $arg2, $arg3) = @_;

  SUBTASK1: {
        my $some_var = ...
        ...
        ...
        ...
    }

    ...

  SUBTASK2: {
        ...
        ...
        ...
        ...
        ...
        ...
    }

    ...
    ...
}

[download]

I do have to question your claim. What makes variable names much less important than subroutine names? Variables are referred to much more often.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Coding style: truth of variable name (subroutine length)
by Anonymous Monk on Apr 19, 2020 at 10:01 UTC

    My subroutines can range from just a few lines to over several hundred lines long. I do have to question your claim. What makes variable names much less important than subroutine names? Variables are referred to much more often.

    isnt it obvious? subroutine length, obviously :)

    these are all identical for a screen full (40 to 100 lines) dir dir0 entry arg module modulepm file path ana

    entry arg anal dir0 are the shit versions from least to most. But only cause I dont actually think that way.

    Even they doesnt increase cognitive load... Var names only need to be close enough.

    hundred lines long ... arg1 arg2 arg3 subtask1 subtask2

    never

    chop it down to skimmable code

    @args Ebony() Ivory() Harmony()

    age of peter, sum of bob

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom