Re: RFC: use readable $(cmd) syntax instead of unreadable `cmd`
"Wesley J. Landaker" <wjl@icecavern.net> writes:
> On Friday 09 February 2007 11:11, Jari Aalto wrote:
>> I have reported bugs against backtick and suggested to change to use
>> the more readable alternative. The result was surprising. To quote
>> one message (bug closed reasoning):
>>
>> "If your development environment cannot display ` differently than '
>> , you need to get a new one."
>>
>> I'm askinf if it is ok to to reopen such bugs based of better QA
>> aspects. Possibly by providing patches if the maintainer is busy
>> elsewhere to handle such a "minor issue" from his perspective.
>
> IMHO:
>
> I would be happy to see bugs against my own packages that *clearly*
> increased usability and readability of code, as long as they included
> tested, working, patches.
I think this requirement is too high. A simple message sent to me
suggesting alternatives has always go my mind processes going. No need
to require full test suite and all that, because the developer knows
how to fill in the gaps.
> But a bug that asks to change coding style just for the sake of style or
> preference of someone who isn't even working on the software at all
> wouldn't be as welcome.
Style changes over the time. New ideas always open up mind to see
things from other perspective, so it's not that "status quo" is the
preferred solution in software methodology (Think Extreme
Programming/Agile where refactoring is the motivation factor of
keeping code always up to date to current standards)
Jari
Reply to: