Re: RFC: Tutorial: use strict; now what!?

Under Purpose of Strictures you wrote "We often use strict; to prevent us from making stupid or careless mistakes."

Who are the ubiquitous "we" and "us"?

A direct tone would work better. For example..."Use strict; to prevent stupid or careless mistakes".

Also, the final sentence of this same paragraph is overly emphatic and not necessary. The chainguard metaphor makes your point very clear.

My 2 cents.

Comment on Re: RFC: Tutorial: use strict; now what!? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: RFC: Tutorial: use strict; now what!? (stupid) by tye (Sage) on Feb 08, 2012 at 17:44 UTC
For example..."Use strict; to prevent stupid or careless mistakes". A direct tone can be useful. Combining a direct tone with the word "stupid" is probably... not smart. Yes, a "stupid mistake" does not actually imply that the actor is generally stupid. But I'm sure there will be readers who are... um... not fluent enough in English to realize that. The word "careless" is not much less loaded. I would suggest combining the direct tone with the phrase "typographical errors (typos)". Though, not having read the tutorial, there might be another approach that better fits into it. - tye	[reply]
Re^2: RFC: Tutorial: use strict; now what!? by Xiong (Hermit) on Feb 08, 2012 at 22:34 UTC
Agreed; delete: `<c>use strict;</c> is the <i>chainguard</i> that keeps you from ripping off your own fingers. - Use it for your own safety.` [download] I'm not the guy you kill, I'm the guy you buy. —Michael Clayton	[reply] [d/l]
Re^2: RFC: Tutorial: use strict; now what!? by Xiong (Hermit) on Feb 09, 2012 at 12:16 UTC
Who are the ubiquitous "we" and "us"? We cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls, we drive your ambulances, we guard you while you sleep. Do not fuck with us. I'm not the guy you kill, I'm the guy you buy. —Michael Clayton	[reply]
Re^3: RFC: Tutorial: use strict; now what!? by RedElk (Hermit) on Feb 09, 2012 at 14:32 UTC
That's cute. But, I'm not sure you got my point. The way you employ the ubiquitous "we" and "us" in your tutorial sounds like you're talking down to your reader. Not the right tone, in my opinion.	[reply]
Re^4: RFC: Tutorial: use strict; now what!? by Xiong (Hermit) on Feb 09, 2012 at 20:29 UTC
Sorry; we don't agree. I'm not the guy you kill, I'm the guy you buy. —Michael Clayton	[reply] [d/l]
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.


Think about Loose Coupling
	PerlMonks