On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Andrew Savige wrote: > I suppose all the above sites could do with more quality content. Bottom > line: a quality review is unpaid work taking considerable time and > effort; there will always be a shortage of them. Notice that Uri Guttman > offers a commerical code review service.
I've done that too. Doing a truly thorough review takes a fair amount of time. When I've been paid to do it I try to evaluate the code in a number of areas, include "Perl-ishness" (are they using Perl effectively), security flaws, robustness, correctness, efficiency, quality of comments, quality of docs (hah, they never exist!). I also make specific suggestions for improvements. For CPAN modules, you have to add in an evaluation of the API itself, from the standpoint of an API consumer. Needless to say, doing that for any non-trivial amount of code is a lot of work. I think part of the reason I haven't done this sort of stuff for CPAN modules is that it's just so much work. I've written some reviews on cpanratings of stuff I've used a fair amount, or stuff that is obviously horribly wrong, but that's about it. -dave /*======================= House Absolute Consulting www.houseabsolute.com =======================*/
