Bret Hughes wrote:
> Got to something worng with this code. Are you sure it's perl? I mean,
> I can understand it. too easy. I wrote a perl script to parse a bunch
> of stuff from debug logs in a long running program about a year ago
> (thanks to O'riley and this list) and when I went back a couple of weeks
> ago I had no @&* idea what I had done. Really powerful really cryptic.
> Like I said earlier are you sure this is perl?
Perl is very much like straight shell programming with regular
expressions-- there are always several ways of accomplishing the same
task. For every convoluted solution there's one that isn't as clever
but much more understandable. Worse, the clever solution may or may
NOT be more efficient.
After almost 25 years in the field, and having worked with Unix for
over 20 of those years I, personally, abhor this class of "clever"
"efficient" programming tricks, be they script or code. Part of this
is because I've done those "clever" "efficient" tricks myself and paid
the price in later support effort.
Unless you can quanitatively show meaningful performance improvements
in critical programs or scripts, there's no reason to use the convoluted
solution. (Why do I care? I may end up trying to support your hack...)
Cheers,
--
Dave Ihnat
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.
