Piers Cawley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Adam Spiers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > While we're at it, another quick poll: > > > > my $self = shift; > > my $arg = shift; > > > > or > > > > my ($self, $arg) = @_; > > > > ? > > > > IIRC some of my cow-orkers here benchmarked it and found that the > > latter was noticeably faster. > > I prefer the former of the two options. I think it reveals your > intention better (and makes life easier for the refactoring browser > I'm working on...). However, my current favourite is: > > my $self = shift; > my($arg1, $arg2, @foo) = @_;
That's my favourite too, since it separates the OO handling from the argument handling. Except ... > (Note the lack of space between my and the opening brace... I find that the lack of space decreases legibility, and also makes it look more like a function call than a declaration. Not much in it though :-) > > I've added a coding conventions section to doc/consensus.txt for this > > stuff. With the presence of the various branches around, I think it's > > important that we only edit doc/consensus.txt in HEAD. > > Frankly, I'd like to see PDC_REFACTOR merged ASAP, Absolutely, I'm all for that too. > but I think there might be a few more modules to move around, I'm > really not keen on the Test::Unit::TestFoo style, and, from > discussions elsewhere, I think it'd be a good idea to move > Test::Unit itself into Test::Unit::Procedural. There seem to be a > fair few folks at the moment who think that Test::Unit is the main > interface to PerlUnit. Good idea. _______________________________________________ Perlunit-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/perlunit-devel
