chromatic wrote:
On Monday 27 October 2008 10:45:46 Salve J Nilsen wrote:

Remember, this is not a project designed only to say "This code sucks."
Its intent is to encourage people to improve their code.  My code
doesn't magically get better when someone finds a bug.  It magically
gets better when someone *fixes* a bug.

One is a prerequisite of the other. You have to have some indication that
a bug exists before you can fix it (let's ignore "accidental bugfixes" for
now.) So unless you live in a bubble all by yourself, this list will at
the very least increase the likelyhood of you learning about (in this case
Kwalitee) bugs.

A public hall of shame that several people on the Perl-QA mailing list did
not know about has a very marginal effect on increasing the likelihood of learning about a problem. I'm not a statistician, so I can confidently say
that the chance of that occurring is non-zero.  (Randomly stumbling across
several billion web pages will *eventually* get you there.)

We're still talking about a marketing/visibility bug here. Don't you agree it's better to fix that instead?


This is a good thing. Especially if the scale we're measuring the code is sensible, well thought out and relevant. If your ego gets a bruising, too bad. The code Kwalitee is more important.

Heaping random, unsolicited, and public abuse on contributors is a fantastic
way to make sure there are no Kwalitee programs -- in the sense that
abusing contributors is a great way to make sure that there are no more
contributors.

There's nothing random or abusing here, just feedback on Kwalitee comparisons between modules. If this feedback hurts your (or anyone elses) tender little feelings, then too bad. A psychologist would remind you not to equate critique of your writings with critique of yourself.


- Salve

--
#!/usr/bin/perl
sub AUTOLOAD{$AUTOLOAD=~/.*::(\d+)/;seek(DATA,$1,0);print#  Salve Joshua Nilsen
getc DATA}$"="'};&{'";@_=unpack("C*",unpack("u*",':4@,$'.#     <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]>
'2!--"5-(50P%$PL,!0X354UC-PP%/0\`'."\n"));eval "&{'@_'}";   __END__ is near! :)

Reply via email to