Edward Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Terry Hancock wrote: > >> But the real point is that no one here can make >> any reasonably objective assessment of whether your "data" is >> meaningful unless you post examples. That's what creates the >> hostility, I think. > > Fair enough. But see my other posts on why I'm not interested in > objective assessments of my code. For inquiries into real-world code, > it's enough to believe that I'm not lying, e.g. that I have the > programs and ran the tests described. The actual file contents are > almost irrelevant. Nothing one can say about my code tells us > anything about typical code in the wild. Producing more data points > _will_ tell us that. If my data are an outlier, they may be worthless > anyway. > > That's what I'm interested in. Others are interested in analyzing my > code. Which is fine, it's just not what I'm after.
In that case I think it's safe to say that a majority of Perl code out in the wild is extrememly badly coded. Just download 10 free Perl CGI scripts to see my point. I wouldn't be amazed if this is not the case for Python, or at least way less. But be very carefull to draw any conclusion out of this :-D. -- John MexIT: http://johnbokma.com/mexit/ personal page: http://johnbokma.com/ Experienced programmer available: http://castleamber.com/ Happy Customers: http://castleamber.com/testimonials.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
