Adriano Rodrigues wrote:
I think planning and testing your modules under -T is just being a good
CPANizen; just like warnings/strict and writing pod.
Hey, that could be the next optional metrics for CPANTS:
run_under_taint. A bonus point for the ones that cared about it. It
makes me afraid because all my code complains when using tainting -
but it may be time to learn more.
I like it very much indeed. It's just the sort of thing that CPANTS was
created to achieve.
I'd be tempted to go so far as to say we should make it a regular score,
not an optional score.
The idea always was to keep adding new metrics and it should really be
extremely hard to get all your modules and "win" the CPANTS game.
Making it a regular point might fit these goals quite nicely. The key
would be whether or not we can find any reasons why certain situations
might dictate that we should not use -T.
But I'm not aware of any of those.
I guess the tricky bit is measuring it, do we just look for -T in the
test scripts?
If we add this, it's definitely going to hurt me in the game, but I
think it might be worth it.
Thoughts?
Adam K
