X-Git-Url: http://git.shadowcat.co.uk/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?a=blobdiff_plain;f=pod%2Fperlstyle.pod;h=3fb93970909dbf52e25eac33b6a0ac350d21572a;hb=83272a45226e83bd136d713158e9b44ace2dbc8d;hp=bfc94a9eaa95222f0634260cf648ac311c3a4a98;hpb=4a6725af9146bd7faaa10aa5429ff009d393fd6d;p=p5sagit%2Fp5-mst-13.2.git diff --git a/pod/perlstyle.pod b/pod/perlstyle.pod index bfc94a9..3fb9397 100644 --- a/pod/perlstyle.pod +++ b/pod/perlstyle.pod @@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ make your programs easier to read, understand, and maintain. The most important thing is to run your programs under the B<-w> flag at all times. You may turn it off explicitly for particular -portions of code via the C<$^W> variable if you must. You should -also always run under C or know the reason why not. -The C and even C pragmas may also prove -useful. +portions of code via the C pragma or the C<$^W> variable +if you must. You should also always run under C or know the +reason why not. The C and even C pragmas +may also prove useful. Regarding aesthetics of code lay out, about the only thing Larry -cares strongly about is that the closing curly brace of +cares strongly about is that the closing curly bracket of a multi-line BLOCK should line up with the keyword that started the construct. Beyond that, he has other preferences that aren't so strong: @@ -242,7 +242,7 @@ to fit on one line anyway. Always check the return codes of system calls. Good error messages should go to STDERR, include which program caused the problem, what the failed -system call and arguments were, and VERY IMPORTANT) should contain the +system call and arguments were, and (VERY IMPORTANT) should contain the standard system error message for what went wrong. Here's a simple but sufficient example: @@ -250,7 +250,7 @@ sufficient example: =item * -Line up your translations when it makes sense: +Line up your transliterations when it makes sense: tr [abc] [xyz]; @@ -260,9 +260,9 @@ Line up your translations when it makes sense: Think about reusability. Why waste brainpower on a one-shot when you might want to do something like it again? Consider generalizing your code. Consider writing a module or object class. Consider making your -code run cleanly with C and B<-w> in effect. Consider giving away -your code. Consider changing your whole world view. Consider... oh, -never mind. +code run cleanly with C and C (or B<-w>) in +effect. Consider giving away your code. Consider changing your whole +world view. Consider... oh, never mind. =item *