On Thursday 07 June 2007 23:03:51 A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> Fiddling with the POD before I’m done is beyond pointless.
I'm willing to bet that you write documentation as the last task before
bundling a release too. That's also my style.
-- c
* Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-06-08 07:40]:
> >Conversely, when I edit code, I occasionally want to shift big
> >swathes of stuff around; having to carry along all the POD
> >before I’m done would bog me down for no gain whatsoever,
> >particularly in light of the fact that such changes
# from A. Pagaltzis
# on Thursday 07 June 2007 10:25 pm:
>Documentation should form a coherent narrative. The myopic view
>of inlined local POD sections is a hindrance to that.
We need to be able to switch the folding between pod and not-pod, eh?
>Conversely,
>when I edit code, I occasionally
* Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-06-08 00:15]:
> On Jun 7, 2007, at 5:04 PM, Matisse Enzer wrote:
> >I wonder how you all feel these days about the "put the pod at
> >the __END__" approach? I've been trying it for over a year now
> >and am not really sure its the best way to go (vs. having t
# from Joshua ben Jore
# on Thursday 07 June 2007 05:14 pm:
>On 6/7/07, Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I've never seen the benefit of pod after __END__. IMO, your code
>> and docs should follow the same order/groupings.
>
>It has two benefits.
>...readable without syntax highlighting.
# from Andy Armstrong
# on Thursday 07 June 2007 03:44 pm:
>I definitely think
>
>$ podlifter -end lib/My/Stuff.pm
>
>and
>
>$ podlifter -interleaved lib/My/Stuff.pm
>
>need to exist.
Ingy had something in that vein, but I'm not sure it does the round
trip.
Also, podadz
http://scratchcomputing
On 6/7/07, Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've never seen the benefit of pod after __END__. IMO, your code and
docs should follow the same order/groupings. That, and you have to
It has two benefits. Separating code from pod prevents it from being
wholely unreadable without syntax hig
I've done pod both ways, for over a year each way, and I am not really
happy with either approach.
If I was using an editor that did pod-folding the way Eclipse does javadoc
folding, then i would probably favor the inline approach.
-M
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, chromatic wrote:
> On Thursday 07 June
On Thursday 07 June 2007 15:36:49 Eric Wilhelm wrote:
> I've never seen the benefit of pod after __END__. IMO, your code and
> docs should follow the same order/groupings.
Why? I can imagine several different conceptual groupings within
documentation that have little meaning within code. The
On 7 Jun 2007, at 23:25, chromatic wrote:
Yeah, but you (as all true-hearted people do) think that, after
you've written
your first line of code, it's ALL maintenance.
Yeah the maintenance / non-maintenance distinction was glib. I really
meant "at different times I prefer different doc layo
On 7 Jun 2007, at 23:16, Andy Lester wrote:
On Jun 7, 2007, at 5:13 PM, Andy Armstrong wrote:
So: Interleaved for the first draft, at the end for maintenance.
To me, this is the same as saying "I turn off warnings and strict
when I'm done writing the program."
It's a compromise. Nothing i
# from Andy Armstrong
# on Thursday 07 June 2007 03:13 pm:
>I'd like an editor that lets me look at it either way. Sometimes I
>want to look at uninterrupted code - in which case interleaved
>documentation just gets in the way. Other times it's nice to be able
>to read the code while documen
On Thursday 07 June 2007 15:28:41 Andy Lester wrote:
> If I'm ever asked at a job interview "Do you mostly do new code or
> maintenance programming?", I ask "Explain the difference to me."
Only monkeys do maintenance programming. Real programmers write brilliant,
fantastic code using only the f
Zak,
>From Classic Vista Menu, click Start --> Programs --> Accessories -->
right click on Command Prompt and click on Run as Administrator.
Michael Abugow
ValueClick, Inc.
Internal Systems Specialist
Direct: (818) 575-4593
-Original Message-
From: Imam, Zak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
S
On Jun 7, 2007, at 5:25 PM, chromatic wrote:
Yeah, but you (as all true-hearted people do) think that, after
you've written
your first line of code, it's ALL maintenance.
If I'm ever asked at a job interview "Do you mostly do new code or
maintenance programming?", I ask "Explain the diffe
On Thursday 07 June 2007 15:16:35 Andy Lester wrote:
> On Jun 7, 2007, at 5:13 PM, Andy Armstrong wrote:
> > So: Interleaved for the first draft, at the end for maintenance.
> To me, this is the same as saying "I turn off warnings and strict
> when I'm done writing the program."
Yeah, but you (
On Jun 7, 2007, at 5:13 PM, Andy Armstrong wrote:
So: Interleaved for the first draft, at the end for maintenance.
To me, this is the same as saying "I turn off warnings and strict
when I'm done writing the program."
--
Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
On 7 Jun 2007, at 23:10, Andy Lester wrote:
It's 100% wrong. Put the docs next to the code. It's easier to
see than to think.
Rockin' - we can have a religious war about it! :)
--
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net
On 7 Jun 2007, at 23:04, Matisse Enzer wrote:
I wonder how you all feel these days about the "put the pod at
the __END__" approach? I've been trying it for over a year now
and am not really sure its the best way to go (vs. having the pod
for each method right next to it.)
I'd like an editor th
On Jun 7, 2007, at 5:04 PM, Matisse Enzer wrote:
I wonder how you all feel these days about the "put the pod at
the __END__" approach? I've been trying it for over a year now
and am not really sure its the best way to go (vs. having the pod
for each method right next to it.)
It's 100% wrong.
Sorry on Vista so that I can bypass the UAC stuff...
-Original Message-
From: Imam, Zak
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 5:02 PM
To: 'Jeffrey Thalhammer'; perl-qa@perl.org
Subject: Command Prompt as Admin
Does any one know the parameters for opening up the Command Prompt in
and Admin Mode?
I wonder how you all feel these days about the "put the pod at
the __END__" approach? I've been trying it for over a year now
and am not really sure its the best way to go (vs. having the pod
for each method right next to it.)
-M
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Jeffrey Thalhammer wrote:
> > I've written ple
On Thursday 07 June 2007 14:45:52 Jeffrey Thalhammer wrote:
> > I've written plenty of modules with lots of code
> > but very minimal external interfaces that need only
> > a page to describe.
> In such cases, do you find that you've used more
> comments in the code? This it isn't quite the same
Does any one know the parameters for opening up the Command Prompt in
and Admin Mode???
"cmd - admin"... didn't work...
Thanx Zak
> I've written plenty of modules with lots of code
> but very minimal external interfaces that need only
> a page to describe.
In such cases, do you find that you've used more
comments in the code? This it isn't quite the same
metric, but there is probably some ratio of code to
non-code that most
On Thursday 07 June 2007 14:10:00 Jeffrey Thalhammer wrote:
> RequireMinimumPodContent - POD must have a minimum
> number of words per statement of code. You could use
> a complexity score or some other metric as the basis
> instead. Quantity does not equal Quality, but it might
> prod people in
--- Ian Malpass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been documenting lately, so I'm a bit
> POD-focussed at the moment :) I was pondering
> creating Pod::Critic, as a documentation analogue
> of Perl::Critic.
Some other ideas (not suitable for everyone)...
RequireCompilableSynopsis - For modules
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Nadim Khemir wrote:
>
>> 'method docs have examples': I believe the examples should be tested.
>
David Cantrell wrote:
> I have to disagree. [...] Authors will say "screw that, it's too
> much like hard work, I'll just not use that annoying doco-testin
Nadim Khemir wrote:
'method docs have examples': I believe the examples should be tested.
I have to disagree. Examples will often show you how to use a method
but not bother specifying values. Variables will often be used without
declaring them, and the example code for a method will assum
29 matches
Mail list logo
