Re: Keeping perl credible in the eyes of the world..

What can we as a community do to promote higher quality code?

The first thing you would have to do is define what is: "high quality code".

Ask that question of 10 programmers and you'll likely get 11 definitions. I can think if 3 without trying:

Code that meets it's specification.
But if the spec. is bad, is the code good?
Code that passes all it's tests.
If the tests are incomplete is the code good?
Code that works. (Or rather, it hasn't failed yet!)
Is this premature? Immature? Negligent?
Depends.
1. How long has it been in operation?
2. - Does it meet the spec?
  - Does it pass the tests?
  - Is the spec good?
  - Are the tests good?
3. What is the worst that can happen if it fails?

And of course, any given answer to any of these questions is only as good as the person or process that produced it. How do you measure those?

Examine what is said, not who speaks.

"Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham
"Think for yourself!" - Abigail
"Memory, processor, disk in that order on the hardware side. Algorithm, algoritm, algorithm on the code side." - tachyon

Comment on Re: Keeping perl credible in the eyes of the world..

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Keeping perl credible in the eyes of the world.. by Grygonos (Chaplain) on Jun 29, 2004 at 12:51 UTC
Forgive me, I guess what I was trying to say was well commented,maintainable,efficient,scalable, and self-documenting is a plus. That's my definition of quality code. To me it should be implied that high quality code meets specification (good or bad, you can always code it better than the spec requires) I agree it should also be able to pass as complete a test suite as can be devised. Also it should always exit as gracefully as possible with as few side effects as possible. Personally that's my definition. Grygonos	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: Keeping perl credible in the eyes of the world..
by Grygonos (Chaplain) on Jun 29, 2004 at 12:51 UTC

Forgive me, I guess what I was trying to say was well commented,maintainable,efficient,scalable, and self-documenting is a plus. That's my definition of quality code. To me it should be implied that high quality code meets specification (good or bad, you can always code it better than the spec requires) I agree it should also be able to pass as complete a test suite as can be devised. Also it should always exit as gracefully as possible with as few side effects as possible. Personally that's my definition.

Grygonos

[reply]