ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | Download File
/cvs/common-sense/sense.pm
(Generate patch)

Comparing common-sense/sense.pm (file contents):
Revision 1.5 by root, Thu Jul 9 18:08:34 2009 UTC vs.
Revision 1.21 by root, Fri Oct 30 02:58:05 2009 UTC

4 4
5=head1 SYNOPSIS 5=head1 SYNOPSIS
6 6
7 use common::sense; 7 use common::sense;
8 8
9 # roughly the same as, with much lower memory usage: 9 # supposed to be the same, with much lower memory usage, as:
10 # 10 #
11 # use strict qw(vars subs); 11 # use strict qw(vars subs);
12 # use feature qw(say state switch); 12 # use feature qw(say state switch);
13 # no warnings; 13 # no warnings;
14 # use warnings qw(FATAL closed threads internal debugging pack substr malloc
15 # unopened portable prototype inplace io pipe unpack regexp
16 # deprecated exiting glob digit printf utf8 layer
17 # reserved parenthesis taint closure semicolon);
18 # no warnings qw(exec newline);
14 19
15=head1 DESCRIPTION 20=head1 DESCRIPTION
16 21
17This module implements some sane defaults for Perl programs, as defined by 22This module implements some sane defaults for Perl programs, as defined by
18two typical (or not so typical - use your common sense) specimens of 23two typical (or not so typical - use your common sense) specimens of Perl
19Perl coders. 24coders. In fact, after working out details on which warnings and strict
25modes to enable and make fatal, we found that we (and our code written so
26far, and others) fully agree on every option, even though we never used
27warnings before, so it seems this module indeed reflects a "common" sense
28among some long-time Perl coders.
20 29
21=over 4 30=over 4
22 31
23=item no warnings
24
25The dreaded warnings. Even worse, the horribly dreaded C<-w> switch. Even
26though we don't care if other people use warnings (and certainly there are
27useful ones), a lot of warnings simply go against the spirit of Perl, most
28prominently, the warnings related to C<undef>. There is nothing wrong with
29C<undef>: it has well-defined semantics, it is useful, and spitting out
30warnings you never asked for is just evil.
31
32So every module needs C<no warnings> to avoid somebody accidentally using
33C<-w> and forcing his bad standards on our code. No will do.
34
35Funnily enough, L<perllexwarn> explicitly mentions C<-w> (and not in a
36favourable way), but standard utilities, such as L<prove>, or MakeMaker
37when running C<make test> enable them blindly.
38
39=item use strict qw(subs vars) 32=item use strict qw(subs vars)
40 33
41Using C<use strict> is definitely common sense, but C<use strict 34Using C<use strict> is definitely common sense, but C<use strict
42'refs'> definitely overshoots it's usefulness. After almost two 35'refs'> definitely overshoots its usefulness. After almost two
43decades of Perl hacking, we decided that it does more harm than being 36decades of Perl hacking, we decided that it does more harm than being
44useful. Specifically, constructs like these: 37useful. Specifically, constructs like these:
45 38
46 @{ $var->[0] } 39 @{ $var->[0] }
47 40
49scope, and C<$var> can legally be C<undef>: 42scope, and C<$var> can legally be C<undef>:
50 43
51 @{ $var->[0] || [] } 44 @{ $var->[0] || [] }
52 45
53This is annoying, and doesn't shield against obvious mistakes such as 46This is annoying, and doesn't shield against obvious mistakes such as
54using C<"">, so one would even have to write: 47using C<"">, so one would even have to write (at least for the time
48being):
55 49
56 @{ defined $var->[0] ? $var->[0] : [] } 50 @{ defined $var->[0] ? $var->[0] : [] }
57 51
58... which nobody with a bit of common sense would consider 52... which nobody with a bit of common sense would consider
53writing: clear code is clearly something else.
54
59writing. Curiously enough, sometimes, perl is not so strict, as this works 55Curiously enough, sometimes perl is not so strict, as this works even with
60even with C<use strict> in scope: 56C<use strict> in scope:
61 57
62 for (@{ $var->[0] }) { ... 58 for (@{ $var->[0] }) { ...
63 59
64If that isnt hipocrasy! And all that from a mere program! 60If that isn't hypocrisy! And all that from a mere program!
61
65 62
66=item use feature qw(say state given) 63=item use feature qw(say state given)
67 64
68We found it annoying that we always have to enable extra features. If 65We found it annoying that we always have to enable extra features. If
69something breaks because it didn't anticipate future changes, so be 66something breaks because it didn't anticipate future changes, so be
70it. 5.10 broke almost all our XS modules and nobody cared either - and few 67it. 5.10 broke almost all our XS modules and nobody cared either (or at
68least I know of nobody who really complained about gratuitous changes -
69as opposed to bugs).
70
71modules that are no longer maintained work with newer versions of Perl, 71Few modules that are not actively maintained work with newer versions of
72regardless of use feature. 72Perl, regardless of use feature or not, so a new major perl release means
73changes to many modules - new keywords are just the tip of the iceberg.
73 74
74If your code isn't alive, it's dead, jim. 75If your code isn't alive, it's dead, Jim - be an active maintainer.
75 76
76=item much less memory
77 77
78Just using all those pragmas together waste <blink>I<< B<776> kilobytes 78=item no warnings, but a lot of new errors
79>></blink> of precious memory in my perl, for I<every single perl process 79
80using our code>, which on our machines, is a lot. In comparison, this 80Ah, the dreaded warnings. Even worse, the horribly dreaded C<-w>
81module only uses I<< B<four> >> kilobytes (I even had to write it out so 81switch: Even though we don't care if other people use warnings (and
82certainly there are useful ones), a lot of warnings simply go against the
83spirit of Perl.
84
85Most prominently, the warnings related to C<undef>. There is nothing wrong
86with C<undef>: it has well-defined semantics, it is useful, and spitting
87out warnings you never asked for is just evil.
88
89The result was that every one of our modules did C<no warnings> in the
90past, to avoid somebody accidentally using and forcing his bad standards
91on our code. Of course, this switched off all warnings, even the useful
92ones. Not a good situation. Really, the C<-w> switch should only enable
93warnings for the main program only.
94
95Funnily enough, L<perllexwarn> explicitly mentions C<-w> (and not in a
96favourable way, calling it outright "wrong"), but standard utilities, such
97as L<prove>, or MakeMaker when running C<make test>, still enable them
98blindly.
99
100For version 2 of common::sense, we finally sat down a few hours and went
101through I<every single warning message>, identifiying - according to
102common sense - all the useful ones.
103
104This resulted in the rather impressive list in the SYNOPSIS. When we
105weren't sure, we didn't include the warning, so the list might grow in
106the future (we might have made a mistake, too, so the list might shrink
107as well).
108
109Note the presence of C<FATAL> in the list: we do not think that the
110conditions caught by these warnings are worthy of a warning, we I<insist>
111that they are worthy of I<stopping> your program, I<instantly>. They are
112I<bugs>!
113
114Therefore we consider C<common::sense> to be much stricter than C<use
115warnings>, which is good if you are into strict things (we are not,
116actually, but these things tend to be subjective).
117
118After deciding on the list, we ran the module against all of our code that
119uses C<common::sense> (that is almost all of our code), and found only one
120occurence where one of them caused a problem: one of elmex's (unreleased)
121modules contained:
122
123 $fmt =~ s/([^\s\[]*)\[( [^\]]* )\]/\x0$1\x1$2\x0/xgo;
124
125We quickly agreed that indeed the code should be changed, even though it
126happened to do the right thing when the warning was switched off.
127
128
129=item mucho reduced memory usage
130
131Just using all those pragmas mentioned in the SYNOPSIS together wastes
132<blink>I<< B<776> kilobytes >></blink> of precious memory in my perl, for
133I<every single perl process using our code>, which on our machines, is a
134lot. In comparison, this module only uses I<< B<four> >> kilobytes (I even
82it looks like more) of memory on the same platform. 135had to write it out so it looks like more) of memory on the same platform.
83 136
84The money/time/effort/electricity invested in these gigabytes (probably 137The money/time/effort/electricity invested in these gigabytes (probably
85petabytes globally!) of wasted memory could easily save 42 trees, and a 138petabytes globally!) of wasted memory could easily save 42 trees, and a
86kitten! 139kitten!
87 140
141Unfortunately, until everybods applies more common sense, there will still
142often be modules that pull in the monster pragmas. But one can hope...
143
88=cut 144=cut
89 145
90package common::sense; 146package common::sense;
91 147
92our $VERSION = '0.03'; 148our $VERSION = '2.01';
149
150# paste this into perl to find bitmask
151
152# no warnings;
153# use warnings qw(FATAL closed threads internal debugging pack substr malloc unopened portable prototype
154# inplace io pipe unpack regexp deprecated exiting glob digit printf
155# utf8 layer reserved parenthesis taint closure semicolon);
156# no warnings qw(exec newline);
157# BEGIN { warn join "", map "\\x$_", unpack "(H2)*", ${^WARNING_BITS}; exit 0 };
158
159# overload should be included
93 160
94sub import { 161sub import {
95 # no warnings 162 # verified with perl 5.8.0, 5.10.0
96 ${^WARNING_BITS} ^= ${^WARNING_BITS}; 163 ${^WARNING_BITS} ^= ${^WARNING_BITS} ^ "\xfc\x3f\xf3\x00\x0f\xf3\xcf\xc0\xf3\xfc\x33\x03";
97 164
98 # use strict vars subs 165 # use strict vars subs
99 $^H |= 0x00000600; 166 $^H |= 0x00000600;
100 167
101 # use feature 168 # use feature
117=head1 STABILITY AND FUTURE VERSIONS 184=head1 STABILITY AND FUTURE VERSIONS
118 185
119Future versions might change just about everything in this module. We 186Future versions might change just about everything in this module. We
120might test our modules and upload new ones working with newer versions of 187might test our modules and upload new ones working with newer versions of
121this module, and leave you standing in the rain because we didn't tell 188this module, and leave you standing in the rain because we didn't tell
122you. 189you. In fact, we did so when switching from 1.0 to 2.0, which enabled gobs
190of warnings, and made them FATAL on top.
123 191
124Most likely, we will pick a few useful warnings, instead of just disabling
125all of them. And maybe we will load some nifty modules that try to emulate 192Maybe we will load some nifty modules that try to emulate C<say> or so
126C<say> or so with perls older than 5.10 (this module, of course, should 193with perls older than 5.10 (this module, of course, should work with older
127work with older perl versions - supporting 5.8 for example is just common 194perl versions - supporting 5.8 for example is just common sense at this
128sense at this time. Maybe not in the future, but of course you cna trust 195time. Maybe not in the future, but of course you can trust our common
129our common sense). 196sense to be consistent with, uhm, our opinion).
197
198=head1 WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAD TO SAY ABOUT THIS MODULE
199
200apeiron
201
202 "... wow"
203 "I hope common::sense is a joke."
204
205crab
206
207 "i wonder how it would be if joerg schilling wrote perl modules."
208
209Adam Kennedy
210
211 "Very interesting, efficient, and potentially something I'd use all the time."
212 [...]
213 "So no common::sense for me, alas."
214
215H.Merijn Brand
216
217 "Just one more reason to drop JSON::XS from my distribution list"
218
219Pista Palo
220
221 "Something in short supply these days..."
222
223Steffen Schwigon
224
225 "This module is quite for sure *not* just a repetition of all the other
226 'use strict, use warnings'-approaches, and it's also not the opposite.
227 [...] And for its chosen middle-way it's also not the worst name ever.
228 And everything is documented."
229
230BKB
231
232 "[Deleted - thanks to Steffen Schwigon for pointing out this review was
233 in error.]"
234
235Somni
236
237 "the arrogance of the guy"
238 "I swear he tacked somenoe else's name onto the module
239 just so he could use the royal 'we' in the documentation"
240
241dngor
242
243 "Heh. '"<elmex at ta-sa.org>"' The quotes are semantic
244 distancing from that e-mail address."
245
246Jerad Pierce
247
248 "Awful name (not a proper pragma), and the SYNOPSIS doesn't tell you
249 anything either. Nor is it clear what features have to do with "common
250 sense" or discipline."
251
252acme
253
254 "THERE IS NO 'no common::sense'!!!! !!!! !!"
255
256apeiron (meta-comment about us commenting^Wquoting his comment)
257
258 How about quoting this: get a clue, you fucktarded amoeba.
259
260quanth
261
262 common sense is beautiful, json::xs is fast, Anyevent, EV are fast and
263 furious. I love mlehmannware ;)
264
265=head1 FREQUQNTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
266
267Or frequently-come-up confusions.
268
269=over 4
270
271=item Is this module meant to be serious?
272
273Yes, we would have put it under the C<Acme::> namespace otherwise.
274
275=item But the manpage is written in a funny/stupid/... way?
276
277This was meant to make it clear that our common sense is a subjective
278thing and other people can use their own notions, taking the steam out
279of anybody who might be offended (as some people are always offended no
280matter what you do).
281
282This was a failure.
283
284But we hope the manpage still is somewhat entertaining even though it
285explains boring rationale.
286
287=item Why do you impose your conventions on my code?
288
289For some reason people keep thinking that C<common::sense> imposes
290process-wide limits, even though the SYNOPSIS makes it clear that it works
291like other similar modules - only on the scope that uses them.
292
293So, no, we don't - nobody is forced to use this module, and using a module
294that relies on common::sense does not impose anything on you.
295
296=item Why do you think only your notion of common::sense is valid?
297
298Well, we don't, and have clearly written this in the documentation to
299every single release. We were just faster than anybody else w.r.t. to
300grabbing the namespace.
301
302=item But everybody knows that you have to use strict and use warnings,
303why do you disable them?
304
305Well, we don't do this either - we selectively disagree with the
306usefulness of some warnings over others. This module is aimed at
307experienced Perl programmers, not people migrating from other languages
308who might be surprised about stuff such as C<undef>.
309
310In fact, this module is considerably I<more> strict than the canonical
311C<use strict; use warnings>, as it makes all warnings fatal in nature, so
312you can get away with as many things as with the canonical approach.
313
314This was not implemented in version 1.0 because of the daunting number
315of warning categories and the difficulty in getting exactly the set of
316warnings you wish (i.e. look at the SYNOPSIS in how complicated it is to
317get a specific set of warnings - it is not reasonable to put this into
318every module, the maintainance effort would be enourmous).
319
320=item But many modules C<use strict> or C<use warnings>, so the memory
321savings do not apply?
322
323I am suddenly so sad.
324
325But yes, that's true. Fortunately C<common::sense> still uses only a
326miniscule amount of RAM.
327
328=item But it adds another dependency to your modules!
329
330It's a fact, yeah. But it's trivial to install, most popular modules have
331many more dependencies and we consider dependencies a good thing - it
332leads to better APIs, more thought about interworking of modules and so
333on.
334
335=item But! But!
336
337Yeah, we know.
338
339=back
130 340
131=head1 AUTHOR 341=head1 AUTHOR
132 342
133 Marc Lehmann <schmorp@schmorp.de> 343 Marc Lehmann <schmorp@schmorp.de>
134 http://home.schmorp.de/ 344 http://home.schmorp.de/
135 345
136 Robin Redeker, "<elmex at ta-sa.org>". 346 Robin Redeker, "<elmex at ta-sa.org>".
137 347
138
139=cut 348=cut
140 349

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines