Sorry, Chris, but I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. I suppose I don't really think about it in terms of libraries but rather in terms of classes. In theory, a script should be able to be broken down into concepts which fit into classes.
I think sometimes we end up using subroutines in scripts because we haven't scrutinized the actual "function" enough. For instance, take a look at tools/letter.pl. Another scary one is opac/oai.pl, although that's actually created packages in the pl script which I think is actually worse in a way. Maybe it's not feasible to always have subroutines defined in Perl Modules. However, I rather there be a blanket ban on them, and allow exceptions to that rule on the discretion of the QA team and the RM. As Tomas has said, I think there's been an existing practice for some at least a few releases now to fail patches which have complex subroutines in Perl Files. This would simply be codifying an existing informal rule. David Cook Systems Librarian Prosentient Systems 72/330 Wattle St, Ultimo, NSW 2007 > -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher Nighswonger [mailto:chris.nighswon...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, 1 October 2015 12:58 AM > To: Philippe Blouin <philippe.blo...@inlibro.com> > Cc: David Cook <dc...@prosentient.com.au>; Tomas Cohen Arazi > <tomasco...@gmail.com>; Koha Devel <koha-de...@lists.koha- > community.org> > Subject: Re: [Koha-devel] Add rule for no subroutines in PL scripts > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Philippe Blouin > <philippe.blo...@inlibro.com> wrote: > > Because the code would be extremely specific to a specific > > functionality, whereas the code in the libraries is there to be reused. > > And let not go overboard with OO. > > > > A script is a script is a script. Make it readable, add functions to > > make it cleaner, make your functions readable. > > > > And make some rule for forbidding direct DB accesses, so that future > > DB changes do not require to change many scripts. > > But please, do not forbid functions in scripts. > > I tend to agree with Philipee here. It is a bit of an overkill to blanket > require a > single-script function to be moved over to a library. Perhaps a better > approach would be to add some rules which set for the case where functions > in scripts should be moved into the appropriate library versus when the > definition of functions is acceptable in the script itself. > > Kind regards, > Chris _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
