Re^2: Automate perltidy for PM code?

While I would agree with on not automagically using perltidy, why should PM remain neutral about advising it? While layout style discussions waste a lot of time, I think we could all agree that following any standard is best practices and if you're having trouble deciding what that standard should be than maybe the default settings of perltidy could fill the gap.

-derby

Comment on Re^2: Automate perltidy for PM code?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Automate perltidy for PM code? by GrandFather (Saint) on Jul 09, 2007 at 21:26 UTC
For one thing, because the quality of the code (and thus the stage of the querent's Perl journey) is often reflected in less tangible elements like the use of white space and identifiers. A lot of information could be lost by running everything through PerlTidy - including the entire point of some questions, especially those involving style considerations. DWIM is Perl's answer to Gödel	[reply]
Re^4: Automate perltidy for PM code? by Moron (Curate) on Jul 10, 2007 at 09:22 UTC
Yes and I think we're all unanimous now that it can't be forced on every node. __________________________________________________________________________________ ^M Free your mind!	[reply]
Re^3: Automate perltidy for PM code? by jdporter (Paladin) on Jul 09, 2007 at 17:58 UTC
And PerlMonks should recommend Parse::RecDescent for all your parsing sorro`^W`needs, too. A word spoken in Mind will reach its own level, in the objective world, by its own weight	[reply]
Re^4: Automate perltidy for PM code? by derby (Abbot) on Jul 09, 2007 at 18:29 UTC
Now you're just being silly. -derby	[reply]
Re^5: Automate perltidy for PM code? by Anonymous Monk on Jul 10, 2007 at 08:04 UTC
He's mocking your idea, you silly.	[reply]


Do you know where your variables are?
	PerlMonks