Jonathan Ellis wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:08:44 -0700, Michael Torrie
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Other that code written very clearly, perl is one of the easiest
languages to write unreadable code in that a future maintainer will have
no hope of understanding. It's not the one always implies
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 01:40 -0700, Shane Hathaway wrote:
I actually think Perl has a really provocative philosophy. As I
understand it, Larry Wall is a linguist, and he has observed that
spoken languages evolve in strange ways, so why shouldn't programming
languages do the same? The result
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:40:51 -0700, Shane Hathaway
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said
While I also prefer Python, putting down Perl programmers is
counterproductive.
When I was young I started out programming in Turbo Pascal. My high
school actually had a Usenet feed back then, 1990-ish. I bridled at
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 06:38 -0800, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
Which is the long way of saying, I hope the the distinction between
putting down Perl and putting down Perl programmers is not lost
here.
I think you're either missing or deliberately ignoring an important
message here. I'm probably the
Jonathan Ellis wrote:
Which is the long way of saying, I hope the the distinction between
putting down Perl and putting down Perl programmers is not lost
here.
Well, you put down programmers, not the language, when you said That's
why these days you mostly see sysadmins and other
On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 09:55:47AM -0700, Stuart Jansen wrote:
Finally, if there's any confusion about the 'distinction between
putting down Perl and putting down Perl programmers', it's entirely
your fault. You've not been doing a good job of maintaining the
distinction.
That sentence is
Stuart Jansen wrote:
Instead, it could be that the list has gotten used to me and has decided
I'm hopeless.
I don't think yer hopeless. I dream of the day when the cuddly little
teddy bear inside you, just hankerin to get loose, will finally be able
to express himself ;-P
Mister Ed
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 06:38 -0800, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
Yes, it was an interesting experiment. The problem is that the verdict
has been in for years now, and it is that a computer language that
doesn't design for orthogonality doesn't lead to Code Poetry; it leads,
more often than not, to a
On 1/27/06, Jonathan Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which is the long way of saying, I hope the the distinction between
putting down Perl and putting down Perl programmers is not lost
here.
I'm against that EVIL and IMMORAL and ILLEGAL war in
Iraq!! Anyone who supports or signs up
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 10:07 -0700, Roberto Mello wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 09:55:47AM -0700, Stuart Jansen wrote:
Finally, if there's any confusion about the 'distinction between
putting down Perl and putting down Perl programmers', it's entirely
your fault. You've not been doing a
On 1/27/06, Bryan Sant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/27/06, Jonathan Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which is the long way of saying, I hope the the distinction between
putting down Perl and putting down Perl programmers is not lost
here.
I'm against that EVIL and IMMORAL and ILLEGAL war
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 10:27 -0700, Bryan Sant wrote:
I personally learn more from our fights, than the casual discussions.
So, keep throwing those hand grenades! ;-)
/me dumps a pallet of thick J2EE books on Bryan
--
Stuart Jansen e-mail/jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 1/27/06, Ross Werner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
(obfuscated Perl contest? Isn't that redundant?)
Ha! That's awesome. I'm going to use that line in the future :-).
*What*, exactly, about the language causes this? And can you find any
examples of
On Jan 27, 2006, at 11:14 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
Well, you put down programmers, not the language, when you said
That's
why these days you mostly see sysadmins and other not-really-
experienced
developers using Perl.
It's no sin to be inexperienced. We all start that way. Just like
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 10:14 -0800, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:06:05 -0700, Shane Hathaway
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Jonathan Ellis wrote:
Which is the long way of saying, I hope the the distinction between
putting down Perl and putting down Perl programmers is not lost
I can't speak for Jonathan, and I'm not a perl hater, but I would say
that perl is (or at least can be) messy because the syntax is too
rich. There are too many ways to express the same thing.
Wow, someone's hit the nail on the head finally. Some people like being
told how to think. Others
A whole bunch of stuff preceeding this post
I'm surprised with all this talk of Perl, Python, and Java there hasn't
been more talk of Ruby.
We all know that Ruby's creator (Yukihiro Matsumoto) is a MORMON. And
since we are in UTAH shouldn't we all be using this language created by a
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 11:29:06 -0700, Levi Pearson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Jan 27, 2006, at 11:14 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
It's no sin to be inexperienced. We all start that way. Just like me
and my Pascal.
You have clearly implied that any developer that continues to use
Perl must
On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 11:51:57AM -0700, Ryan Simpkins wrote:
A whole bunch of stuff preceeding this post
I'm surprised with all this talk of Perl, Python, and Java there hasn't
been more talk of Ruby.
We all know that Ruby's creator (Yukihiro Matsumoto) is a MORMON. And
since we
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 10:59 -0800, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
My apologies for not having a peer-reviewed study correlating experience
with perl use.
Thank you for using sarcasm to indicate you aren't sorry. That's much
better than claiming your were unfairly misunderstood.
--
Stuart Jansen
Ruby. Ruby. Ruby. Perl is okay, but only as long as he takes the
discussions. Python can come hang out on Friday, but he has to
leave at
midnight.
Fridays he can stay till 1:30. Every other night - midnight.
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe:
On Jan 27, 2006, at 11:59 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
This has been a very clear pattern if you follow the respective usenet
groups. If it's insulting to say so, so be it. Please continue
shooting the messenger. :)
You, Mr. Experience, should know better than to draw conclusions from
On 1/27/06, Ryan Simpkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ruby. Ruby. Ruby. Perl is okay, but only as long as he takes the
discussions. Python can come hang out on Friday, but he has to leave at
midnight. Java is to be shunned unless you enjoy the movie CHICAGO.
Ha ha ha. That's great. Now I MUST
Jonathan Ellis wrote:
That's both clearly false (by evidence of many counterexamples)
Sure, you can find exceptions for every rule... Except in your world,
where acknowledging that is weasely. Good luck with that whole
black and white thing.
this wreaks of hypocrisy
ME
/*
PLUG:
Mister E wrote:
Jonathan Ellis wrote:
That's both clearly false (by evidence of many counterexamples)
Sure, you can find exceptions for every rule... Except in your world,
where acknowledging that is weasely. Good luck with that whole
black and white thing.
this wreaks of hypocrisy
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:11:01 -0700, Levi Pearson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Jan 27, 2006, at 11:59 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
This has been a very clear pattern if you follow the respective usenet
groups. If it's insulting to say so, so be it. Please continue
shooting the messenger. :)
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 12:31 -0700, Mister E wrote:
this wreaks of hypocrisy
errr ... reek it should have been
This, ladies and gentleman, is what I call a stopping to smell the
roses moment.
--
Stuart Jansen e-mail/jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
google
You're all language nazis. Whatever your language is, you're a
that-language nazi. That's all I have to say about it.
dtc
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
Stuart Jansen wrote:
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 12:31 -0700, Mister E wrote:
this wreaks of hypocrisy
errr ... reek it should have been
This, ladies and gentleman, is what I call a stopping to smell the
roses moment.
That ain't no rose you got your nose up against ;-P
/*
PLUG:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006, Gregory Hill wrote:
I can't speak for Jonathan, and I'm not a perl hater, but I would say
that perl is (or at least can be) messy because the syntax is too
rich. There are too many ways to express the same thing.
Wow, someone's hit the nail on the head finally. Some
Jonathan Ellis wrote:
My apologies for not having a peer-reviewed study correlating experience
with perl use. Still, that is definitely the case: experienced Perl
developers, who experiment with other languages, tend not to stay
with Perl. You can see this happening in both the Python and the
Jonathan Ellis wrote:
My apologies for not having a peer-reviewed study correlating experience
with perl use. Still, that is definitely the case: experienced Perl
developers, who experiment with other languages, tend not to stay
with Perl. You can see this happening in both the Python and the
Jayce^ wrote:
And this is an excellent example of what I dislike about the python
community at large. There comes a point where, like the language
itself, all the users begin channeling the ego of Guido.
Hehe.
For everyone : please don't take Mr. Ellis as a representative from the
Python
LOL! This has to be the best defense of Ruby I've heard so far! Now
keep in mind that because Mats is Japanese we definitely CAN'T support
RUBY if we're MORMON. As MORMONS we're told to support our nations
leaders and because this is PLUG and not that one P LUG out in
India, we have to support
LOL! This has to be the best defense of Ruby I've heard so far! Now
keep in mind that because Mats is Japanese we definitely CAN'T support
RUBY if we're MORMON. As MORMONS we're told to support our nations
leaders and because this is PLUG and not that one P LUG out in
India, we have to
Erin Sharmahd wrote:
LOL! This has to be the best defense of Ruby I've heard so far! Now
keep in mind that because Mats is Japanese we definitely CAN'T support
RUBY if we're MORMON. As MORMONS we're told to support our nations
leaders and because this is PLUG and not that one P LUG out in
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:08:44 -0700, Michael Torrie
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Other that code written very clearly, perl is one of the easiest
languages to write unreadable code in that a future maintainer will have
no hope of understanding. It's not the one always implies the other;
just that
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 07:56:33 -0700, Stuart Jansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 05:16 -0800, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
That's why these days you mostly see sysadmins and other not-really-
experienced developers using Perl. Or, professionals using it as an
awk/sed replacement,
On 1/26/06, Jonathan Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some companies have to maintain perl codebases. Poor bastards.
If it was for new development, well, gee, surely it couldn't be a case
of a hiring manager not knowing what he's doing! That never happens!
I was trying to just skim through
On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 07:15 -0800, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
We've been down this road before, haven't we? I think it ended up with
me showing that I'm a lot more experienced in perl than you are in about
anything, and you getting your feelings hurt.
I assume you're referring to this post:
40 matches
Mail list logo
