On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:08 PM, David Cook <dc...@prosentient.com.au> wrote: >Sorry, Chris, but I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here.
Let me see if I can clarify it a bit. > 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. In my understanding class implies a related (however loosely) set of data and methods. So to put the suggestion under discussion into practice one would need to essentially create a "module" for every script which contained any "methods" unique to that script or create a sort of catch-all module into which one would place methods which are generally unrelated to each other, but do not properly belong to any other module. Such a module would eventually become rather large and unmanageable I think. Take, for example, this script which produces the pdf file during a label export. http://git.koha-community.org/gitweb/?p=koha.git;a=blob;f=labels/label-create-pdf.pl;h=e69ba41e55634d5b15ad7a993edbd203b649424d;hb=HEAD In it are two subs which might have been made methods of the C4::Labels::Label class, but they are not properly members of that class as they do not operate on a label object, but on the pdf object. Perhaps they could have gone into C4::Creators::PDF class, but that is really just a wrapper to make PDF::Reuse behave OO-like and those subs are totally unrelated to PDF::Reuse. It might go into C4::Creators::Lib as that is not properly a class, but a catch-all for functions to permit them to be called OO-style, but all of the functions in Lib are used by more than one script where the above mentioned are used only once. The script which produces the pdf file is not hard to debug/test as the vast majority of it is OO. The very little bit which is not is still rather straightforward. (BTW, are we talking about writing tests for every single script as well as the various modules? Maybe I'm not seeing something... which is a pretty common thing for me. :-) > > 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. > I certainly agree with your observations in cases such as these. There are undoubtedly many things in Koha which could and should be refactored into OO form, and subs/functions are often used as an easy out by authors. The labels (and friends) code was my feeble attempt to do that in that section of the Koha world. > 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. If it is already the practice of the QA team to examine each instance and pass/fail on the merits of the particular form based on the particular application, then it appears to me that there is no need for a ban. What seems more reasonable is a formal statement of what has been the practice: a case by case determination which requires the author to justify cases that the QA team fails. A ban seems to imply a complete unwillingness to consider the possibility of the potential need of a sub/function. Although I'm sure that is not at all the motive. Ultimately, I'll yield to whatever everyone thinks is best. This is just my humble (and probably uninformed) opinion. 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/
