Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
The stupid question is the question not asked
 
PerlMonks  

Re^4: RFC: Perl-Critic policy: ProhibitInlineSystemArgs

by radiantmatrix (Parson)
on Jul 07, 2006 at 14:05 UTC ( #559794=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^3: RFC: Perl-Critic policy: ProhibitInlineSystemArgs
in thread RFC: Perl-Critic policy: ProhibitInlineSystemArgs

I guess it all comes down to whether your goal in calling system is to provide shell-like capacities, or simply to execute foreign code. I stand by my statement that there are very few instances where the multiple-argument form is a hinderance: it is only a hinderance where you need to interact with the shell directly.

Perhaps your direct experience with system is largely in that category; mine, however, is not -- most times, I see calls to system that are simply execution of foreign code, and require no shell capabilities in the first place.

As for the response to the shell escaping/quoting, it's technically correct if pedantic. The point is, one bypasses the issue when using the multi-arg form -- how isn't entirely important, sorry if the over-simplification confused or annoyed anyone.

Because there are clearly times when the single-argument forms are appropriate, I would not (as I have said before) suggest that this be a high-severity warning. However, it would be a good thing to tickle at a lower severity, from the point of view of "are you sure you know what you're doing, here?"

We've both made our points, and I certainly respect your point of view. I think we'll just have to agree to disagreesort-of agree ;-) on this one.

Updates:

  • 2006-07-07 : agree to disagree? not exactly... see replies

<radiant.matrix>
A collection of thoughts and links from the minds of geeks
The Code that can be seen is not the true Code
I haven't found a problem yet that can't be solved by a well-placed trebuchet
  • Comment on Re^4: RFC: Perl-Critic policy: ProhibitInlineSystemArgs

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: RFC: Perl-Critic policy: ProhibitInlineSystemArgs
by BrowserUk (Pope) on Jul 07, 2006 at 15:45 UTC
    Because there are clearly times when the single-argument forms are appropriate, I would not (as I have said before) suggest that this be a high-severity warning. However, it would be a good thing to tickle at a lower severity, from the point of view of "are you sure you know what you're doing, here?"

    By that paragraph, we are exactly agreeing :)


    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.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://559794]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others cooling their heels in the Monastery: (3)
As of 2020-11-27 07:10 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found

    Notices?