[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

>   Too many people get hung up on <software engineering technique of your
> choice> as the end-all and be-all of design.  They believe (or would like to
> believe) that you must follow all the items on their checklist, and that if
> you do, your program will be perfect.  In reality, there is no such silver
> bullet [1].

And the reason why I commented on that quote is because I know quite a
lot about the culture that it came from.

For example, I know quite a bit about the internal structure of Perl.
Up until a few years ago, the manner in which Perl handled signals was
kindof {ad hoc} (this has recently gotten a lot better).

Now, signals are notoriously difficult to deal with, and they're even
more notorious to deal with in a portable way (and by "portable" I
mean dozens and dozens of platforms).  I mean, if you truly grok the
problem here, you might want to stab your eye out with a pencil...

So anyways, a few years ago I can remember distinctly that one of the
chief implementors of Perl (you'd recognize the name if I mentioned it
here) argued that Perl's signal handling code was "good enough" and
that even though it had problems, it was "good enough" for his
purposes and that he'd be willing to live with the occasional failure.
Luckily, the Perl community ignored this bit of sophistry and worked
to fix the problems.


There is no silver bullet.  And there are times when a program is
"good enough".  But sometimes, in the Perl community, I think that
some people say "good enough" a little bit too quickly.  And I like to
resist that notion a little bit.


If I mention the word "nazi" can this thread die?  (-:

--kevin
-- 
Kevin D. Clark (cetaceannetworks.com!kclark)  |   Will hack Perl for
Cetacean Networks, Inc.                       |  fine food, good beer,
Portsmouth, N.H. (USA)                        |       or fun.
alumni.unh.edu!kclark (PGP Key Available)     |



**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************

Reply via email to