Re: [pbs-devel] [pve-devel] [PATCH manager v2 07/12] api: add routes for webhook notification endpoints

From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
	Max Carrara <m.carrara@proxmox.com>,
	Lukas Wagner <l.wagner@proxmox.com>,
	Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
	<pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [pve-devel] [PATCH manager v2 07/12] api: add routes for webhook notification endpoints
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2024 15:56:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <41acf618-603f-4fe2-aedf-979258ebf0c5@proxmox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D2VZ3QT294RL.2P96JUSP6FNM8@proxmox.com>

just chiming in on the perl dereference style

Am 22/07/2024 um 11:50 schrieb Max Carrara:
>>>> +		%$webhook_properties,
>>> Would prefer `$webhook_properties->%*` here (postfix dereferencing) -
>>> even though not explicitly stated in our style guide, we use that kind
>>> of syntax for calling subroutines behind a reference, e.g.
>>> `$foo->($arg)` instead of `&$foo($arg)`.
>>>
>> I kinda prefer the brevity of the prefix variant in this case. Are there
>> any pitfalls/problems with the prefix that I'm not aware of? If not, I'd prefer
>> to keep this as is, I used the syntax in many other spots in this file 😉
> I personally have no hard feelings if you keep it tbh. Postfix
> dereference is mainly useful if you have e.g. a nested hash (or rather,
> makes more sense) because of how the code is usually read. For example,
> 
>     %$foo->{bar}->{baz}

IIRC above cannot work, and even if, it still might benefit from being
written as `%{$foo->{bar}->{baz}}`

> 
> vs
> 
>     $foo->{bar}->{baz}->%*
> 
> I'd argue that the main benefit is that it's easier to read for people
> who aren't as familiar with Perl, but before this gets too bikesheddy,
> I'm personally fine if you keep it as-is for simple cases like the above
> :P

It can often be a bit easier to read, as you can go from left to right
without having to backtrack to check what the dereferencing actually
affects, though you can get used to both, so of course it can be a bit
subjective.

For variables that are dereferenced as a whole, i.e. not a hash or array
sub-element of them, it's definitely fine to use the `%$foo` style, as it
can't really be confusing, and we already use that all over the place.

For dereferencing a sub-element, I'd slightly prefer the newer variant,
i.e. `$foo->{bar}->%*` for a hash or `$foo->{bar}->@*` for a list.
You could also convert to this variant when touching lines anyway, but I
do not think this is such a big style issue to make that a must or even
do such transformations for their own sake.

_______________________________________________
pbs-devel mailing list
pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel