From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] cleanups for git-send-email Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:23:53 -0700 Message-ID: <7v4ow79pk6.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20090429194852.0976257034@viridian.itc.Virginia.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: gitster@pobox.com (Junio C Hamano), git@vger.kernel.org To: wfp5p@viridian.itc.Virginia.EDU (Bill Pemberton) X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Apr 29 22:24:50 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LzGKl-0000zi-PR for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 22:24:48 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758699AbZD2UYB (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:24:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756351AbZD2UYB (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:24:01 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:53198 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755465AbZD2UYA (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:24:00 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69659AE8FC; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:23:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 11BB8AE8FB; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:23:54 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20090429194852.0976257034@viridian.itc.Virginia.EDU> (Bill Pemberton's message of "Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:48:51 -0400 (EDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: ABF4BE54-34FB-11DE-ACF6-CABC03BA4B0C-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: wfp5p@viridian.itc.Virginia.EDU (Bill Pemberton) writes: > My changes come directly from the book "Perl Best Practices". Just as > ... > Again, it prevents bugs. People use "and" vs "&&" as the same thing, > when they are not. The have different precedence in perl. > > For example, > > next if not $finished || $x < 5; > next if !$finished || $x < 5; > > do not mean the same thing. > ... > Again, it prevents potential bugs down the road.... Earlier I did guide the community not to use "more advanced" (aka "obscure") Perl features so that people not so familiar with Perl can still tweak scripts without breaking them; the tricks in your patches that "prevent potential bugs" are in line with that, and that is why I said my personal taste more or less agrees with your patch already. But the line between "more advanced and tricky" and "if you are coding in Perl you should know your language" is not so black and white as you seem to think. I'd rather defer that decision to whoever is taking send-email over.