|laziness, impatience, and hubris|
Re^4: RFC: Perl-Critic policy: ProhibitInlineSystemArgsby BrowserUk (Pope)
|on Jul 02, 2006 at 14:45 UTC||Need Help??|
Then you are the perfect audience for such a tool, and you will derive great benefit from it so long as you are in a position, (of sufficient authority), to make personal judgements about which rules to apply and when.
But just as many experienced drivers are capable of deciding that 55/65/70 mph is too fast in fog/driving rain/icy/high traffic volume conditions, they are also capable of deciding that it is unnecessarially slow on an empty highway, on a dry, sunny, Sunday morning, but the power-that-be are most unlikely to take a favourable view of them making the latter judgement. Unfortunately, the law is an ass simply because the is no way to enshrine the concept of good judgement into it.
In Germany on certain sections of autobahn, and I believe in Montana on some highways, there is the concept of unlimited speed. If the right vehicle is being driven in the right conditions, in the right way, then there is no set limit over which you can be prosecuted for speeding per se. However, you can be prosecuted for the full range of other road offences--undue care; dangerous driving; endangering other road users; under the various national guises.
So, if you are sure that the vehicle your are in is capable, and the road conditions permit, and you are sure that you will not encounter a policeman who is disgruntled because his application to be on duty at the stadium where the national team are playing Brazil was turned down, then by all means put your foot down. 'scuse me while I let my mind wander.
The point is that you may well be in a position of sufficient authority that you can make appropriate judgements, but for most programmers, most of the time, such rules tend to become black and white enforcements by people who do not understand the reasons underlying them. Second generation management that inherit a flexible system but decide rigid enforcement will better cover their deriars.
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal?
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.