Re: Porting POE to Moose
On 4/27/09 6:07 PM, sungo wrote: On (04/27 16:53), Evan Carroll wrote: You're actually worse than ugly, you're hideous. You're the ugly bastard brother of the ugly duck. Evan, there really are more polite and professional ways to announce a new project. Sending us an email that effectively reads "You all fucking suck but you should help me on replacing your code" does NOT make me want to work with you. Had you presented this any other way, I might have come helped you. However, you decided to present this by being a complete asshole about it. Moose is fantastic and you're doing it a great disservice by being a giant cockmaster. So, this occasional-core-contributor has the following to say: die in a fire. To berate someone for not being more polite and then to do the same yourself? How does that help anyone? Robert
Re: Porting POE to Moose
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 10:58 -0400, Robert Landrum wrote: > Warranted or not, it seems to have been effective. Uh, in what way? because there's now sounds of other people looking at moose too? That's just a coincidence; people have been looking at using Moose and POE together for quite a while now (look at the release date for MooseX::POE for example) It also further proves that Mr. Carroll hasn't bothered to get/stay up-to-date on what is happening in the POE community. which makes his attempt at humour/trolling/whatever that was all the sadder. Martijn
Re: Porting POE to Moose
I, for one, found it humorous. But then, I instantly assume everyone is trolling. Too much fark, I suppose. I bet his approach got a lot more attention than a simple "Hey... check out Moose. It's like POE, only cleaner." Warranted or not, it seems to have been effective. Rob Rocco Caputo wrote: I gave Evan the benefit of the doubt when I asked him to post here despite his multi-year history of abuse in IRC. His project overlaps the efforts of at least two readers, and I had hoped an announcement would start some discussion between projects. I assumed the change of venue might prompt Evan to act more mature, as it has for others. Given the opportunity to compose a longer, more considered message, Evan has instead reached new depths of abrasion. Please forgive me for not sharing your optimism or sense of humor. He's always like this. It's tiresome, it's annoying, and he keeps defying expectations that he'll improve.
Re: Porting POE to Moose
I gave Evan the benefit of the doubt when I asked him to post here despite his multi-year history of abuse in IRC. His project overlaps the efforts of at least two readers, and I had hoped an announcement would start some discussion between projects. I assumed the change of venue might prompt Evan to act more mature, as it has for others. Given the opportunity to compose a longer, more considered message, Evan has instead reached new depths of abrasion. Please forgive me for not sharing your optimism or sense of humor. He's always like this. It's tiresome, it's annoying, and he keeps defying expectations that he'll improve. -- Rocco Caputo - [email protected] On Apr 27, 2009, at 20:31, Todd Chapman wrote: Ok everyone. Evan made a mistake. He was probably making a joke but it didn't go over well. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt. I hope he uses POE as the start of making something really great. If not we still have the POE we know and love. -Todd On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Bill Nash wrote: None, any, or all of this may be true. But I got laid this week. And built three new POE engines. It was really easy because I'm smart. - billn On Apr 27, 2009, at 2:53 PM, Evan Carroll wrote: Dear POE, I'm sick of pulling my hair out because of your 1989 coding practice. I've begun packing your bags to send you to Moose-landville. My goal is to totally deprive you of blessed arrays, and closures in new. I personal yearn for the day when you lack the confusing nonsense that gives you your identity. The problem is other modules don't look like you for a reason -- you're ugly. You're actually worse than ugly, you're hideous. You're the ugly bastard brother of the ugly duck. While you aver that smaller, more modular functions are better for an event driven systems, at your core you're black with deception. You have the longest most ugly and hard to follow monolithic logic ever. But, wait I think I'm playing this down... See, you're more than just one type of ugly: you've actually got all the unique colors of ugly; but, unlike a rainbow they're are in no predictable order. That's right, your capriciously ugly. Above and beyond blessed arrays, why for the love of god do you feel the need to strive for object-orientation through "components." What is a component anyway?!? Why can't I just go my POE- >new( kernel_args )->wheel( wheel_args )->add_to_wheel( new_event ). Why do I have to read to just figure out your obscure coding methodology? Why can't you just be like everyone else. How do your individual components talk to each other, why is it so hard to figure out what your doing when you fail to do what I want? You act like Perl's objects are an unfit for life, but in the end my code just looks like a soup of disassociated components that sometimes work, and sometimes don't. Why is it so hard to publish a module that attaches to the POE Kernel if it is there, and if it isn't operates in a sane fashion... Join me in slaying the dragon: http://github.com/EvanCarroll/MooseyPoopoe/ (All of the POE::Kernel::Filters are migrated and running under the test suite) -- Evan Carroll System Lord of the Internets
Re: Porting POE to Moose
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Rocco Caputo wrote: > On Apr 27, 2009, at 17:53, Evan Carroll wrote: >> ... > You seem to be trying to steal some of POE's cachet in the same breath > you're using to insult its developers and contributors. ... > Your actions are rude, misleading and unethical at best. ... I wasn't planning on commenting on Evan's statement because I felt that it was obviously trollish and should best be ignored. But since it's spawned a thread perhaps I should illuminate that Evan is a known troll in the Catalyst and Moose communities. About 30% of the time he manages to pull something useful out of his otherwise trollish behavior and thus is put on a very short leash by handlers (mst) on the irc.perl.org network (where I've mostly encountered him). POE is wonderful and the few cross Moose/POE excursions show that there is perhaps some overlap between the two systems. Please don't let the actions of one inconsiderate troll reflect poorly on the Moose community, or on any potential Moose and POE projects in the future. As for Evan. Just ignore him and he'll go away. -Chris (maintainer of MooseX::POE).
Re: Porting POE to Moose
Entirely possible he's right. But nothing is perfect, and I would never say POE is. But even at it's most succinct level, Evan's diatribe slipped from funny to malicious, and pretty quick. I'm not exactly the smartest perl programmer on the block, the fucked up shit I do with POE not withstanding, but it's simply not as bad as all this. There's irony, there's exaggeration, and there's wrong. I think Evan is wrong, and I hope he realizes that. - billn On Apr 27, 2009, at 5:31 PM, Todd Chapman wrote: Ok everyone. Evan made a mistake. He was probably making a joke but it didn't go over well. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt. I hope he uses POE as the start of making something really great. If not we still have the POE we know and love. -Todd On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Bill Nash wrote: None, any, or all of this may be true. But I got laid this week. And built three new POE engines. It was really easy because I'm smart. - billn On Apr 27, 2009, at 2:53 PM, Evan Carroll wrote: Dear POE, I'm sick of pulling my hair out because of your 1989 coding practice. I've begun packing your bags to send you to Moose-landville. My goal is to totally deprive you of blessed arrays, and closures in new. I personal yearn for the day when you lack the confusing nonsense that gives you your identity. The problem is other modules don't look like you for a reason -- you're ugly. You're actually worse than ugly, you're hideous. You're the ugly bastard brother of the ugly duck. While you aver that smaller, more modular functions are better for an event driven systems, at your core you're black with deception. You have the longest most ugly and hard to follow monolithic logic ever. But, wait I think I'm playing this down... See, you're more than just one type of ugly: you've actually got all the unique colors of ugly; but, unlike a rainbow they're are in no predictable order. That's right, your capriciously ugly. Above and beyond blessed arrays, why for the love of god do you feel the need to strive for object-orientation through "components." What is a component anyway?!? Why can't I just go my POE- >new( kernel_args )->wheel( wheel_args )->add_to_wheel( new_event ). Why do I have to read to just figure out your obscure coding methodology? Why can't you just be like everyone else. How do your individual components talk to each other, why is it so hard to figure out what your doing when you fail to do what I want? You act like Perl's objects are an unfit for life, but in the end my code just looks like a soup of disassociated components that sometimes work, and sometimes don't. Why is it so hard to publish a module that attaches to the POE Kernel if it is there, and if it isn't operates in a sane fashion... Join me in slaying the dragon: http://github.com/EvanCarroll/MooseyPoopoe/ (All of the POE::Kernel::Filters are migrated and running under the test suite) -- Evan Carroll System Lord of the Internets
Re: Porting POE to Moose
Ok everyone. Evan made a mistake. He was probably making a joke but it didn't go over well. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt. I hope he uses POE as the start of making something really great. If not we still have the POE we know and love. -Todd On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Bill Nash wrote: > None, any, or all of this may be true. > > But I got laid this week. > > And built three new POE engines. It was really easy because I'm smart. > > - billn > > On Apr 27, 2009, at 2:53 PM, Evan Carroll wrote: > >> Dear POE, >> >> I'm sick of pulling my hair out because of your 1989 coding practice. >> I've begun packing your bags to send you to Moose-landville. My goal >> is to totally deprive you of blessed arrays, and closures in new. I >> personal yearn for the day when you lack the confusing nonsense that >> gives you your identity. The problem is other modules don't look like >> you for a reason -- you're ugly. >> >> You're actually worse than ugly, you're hideous. You're the ugly >> bastard brother of the ugly duck. While you aver that smaller, more >> modular functions are better for an event driven systems, at your core >> you're black with deception. You have the longest most ugly and hard >> to follow monolithic logic ever. But, wait I think I'm playing this >> down... See, you're more than just one type of ugly: you've actually >> got all the unique colors of ugly; but, unlike a rainbow they're are >> in no predictable order. That's right, your capriciously ugly. >> >> Above and beyond blessed arrays, why for the love of god do you feel >> the need to strive for object-orientation through "components." What >> is a component anyway?!? Why can't I just go my POE->new( kernel_args >> )->wheel( wheel_args )->add_to_wheel( new_event ). Why do I have to >> read to just figure out your obscure coding methodology? Why can't you >> just be like everyone else. How do your individual components talk to >> each other, why is it so hard to figure out what your doing when you >> fail to do what I want? You act like Perl's objects are an unfit for >> life, but in the end my code just looks like a soup of disassociated >> components that sometimes work, and sometimes don't. Why is it so hard >> to publish a module that attaches to the POE Kernel if it is there, >> and if it isn't operates in a sane fashion... >> >> Join me in slaying the dragon: >> http://github.com/EvanCarroll/MooseyPoopoe/ >> (All of the POE::Kernel::Filters are migrated and running under the >> test suite) >> >> -- >> Evan Carroll >> System Lord of the Internets > >
Re: Porting POE to Moose
None, any, or all of this may be true. But I got laid this week. And built three new POE engines. It was really easy because I'm smart. - billn On Apr 27, 2009, at 2:53 PM, Evan Carroll wrote: Dear POE, I'm sick of pulling my hair out because of your 1989 coding practice. I've begun packing your bags to send you to Moose-landville. My goal is to totally deprive you of blessed arrays, and closures in new. I personal yearn for the day when you lack the confusing nonsense that gives you your identity. The problem is other modules don't look like you for a reason -- you're ugly. You're actually worse than ugly, you're hideous. You're the ugly bastard brother of the ugly duck. While you aver that smaller, more modular functions are better for an event driven systems, at your core you're black with deception. You have the longest most ugly and hard to follow monolithic logic ever. But, wait I think I'm playing this down... See, you're more than just one type of ugly: you've actually got all the unique colors of ugly; but, unlike a rainbow they're are in no predictable order. That's right, your capriciously ugly. Above and beyond blessed arrays, why for the love of god do you feel the need to strive for object-orientation through "components." What is a component anyway?!? Why can't I just go my POE->new( kernel_args )->wheel( wheel_args )->add_to_wheel( new_event ). Why do I have to read to just figure out your obscure coding methodology? Why can't you just be like everyone else. How do your individual components talk to each other, why is it so hard to figure out what your doing when you fail to do what I want? You act like Perl's objects are an unfit for life, but in the end my code just looks like a soup of disassociated components that sometimes work, and sometimes don't. Why is it so hard to publish a module that attaches to the POE Kernel if it is there, and if it isn't operates in a sane fashion... Join me in slaying the dragon: http://github.com/EvanCarroll/MooseyPoopoe/ (All of the POE::Kernel::Filters are migrated and running under the test suite) -- Evan Carroll System Lord of the Internets
Re: Porting POE to Moose
On Apr 27, 2009, at 17:53, Evan Carroll wrote: [] You seem to be trying to steal some of POE's cachet in the same breath you're using to insult its developers and contributors. According to http://www.ohloh.net/p/poe you're trying to walk off with about 34,100 lines of code and about $450,000 worth of effort. Laziness is a Perl virtue, but placing your mantle over a decade's worth of others' work borders upon theft. Your actions are rude, misleading and unethical at best. I urge you to consider developing your own projects rather than, like the Cuckoo, trying to hijack others'. Thank you. -- Rocco Caputo - [email protected]
Re: Porting POE to Moose
Ah... somebody send Evan some Syrup of Epicac. I know from alot of the JaaaVVaa programmers I have to deal with... Everything is an object to them. Well, not everything is an Object. I actually like State machines BETTER.? So think of each POE session as a state machine.? Look at a Moore or Mealy model.? Both work well in POE. I think that Moose ing POE may be akin to putting a Briggs and Stratton motor in a Top Fuel Dragster! (Somethin is wrong with this picture!) Dougie!!! -Original Message- From: Evan Carroll To: [email protected] Sent: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 4:53 pm Subject: Porting POE to Moose Dear POE, I'm sick of pulling my hair out because of your 1989 coding practice. I've begun packing your bags to send you to Moose-landville. My goal is to totally deprive you of blessed arrays, and closures in new. I personal yearn for the day when you lack the confusing nonsense that gives you your identity. The problem is other modules don't look like you for a reason -- you're ugly. You're actually worse than ugly, you're hideous. You're the ugly bastard brother of the ugly duck. While you aver that smaller, more modular functions are better for an event driven systems, at your core you're black with deception. You have the longest most ugly and hard to follow monolithic logic ever. But, wait I think I'm playing this down... See, you're more than just one type of ugly: you've actually got all the unique colors of ugly; but, unlike a rainbow they're are in no predictable order. That's right, your capriciously ugly. Above and beyond blessed arrays, why for the love of god do you feel the need to strive for object-orientation through "components." What is a component anyway?!? Why can't I just go my POE->new( kernel_args )->wheel( wheel_args )->add_to_wheel( new_event ). Why do I have to read to just figure out your obscure coding methodology? Why can't you just be like everyone else. How do your individual components talk to each other, why is it so hard to figure out what your doing when you fail to do what I want? You act like Perl's objects are an unfit for life, but in the end my code just looks like a soup of disassociated components that sometimes work, and sometimes don't. Why is it so hard to publish a module that attaches to the POE Kernel if it is there, and if it isn't operates in a sane fashion... Join me in slaying the dragon: http://github.com/EvanCarroll/MooseyPoopoe/ (All of the POE::Kernel::Filters are migrated and running under the test suite) -- Evan Carroll System Lord of the Internets
Re: Porting POE to Moose
On (04/27 16:53), Evan Carroll wrote: > You're actually worse than ugly, you're hideous. You're the ugly > bastard brother of the ugly duck. Evan, there really are more polite and professional ways to announce a new project. Sending us an email that effectively reads "You all fucking suck but you should help me on replacing your code" does NOT make me want to work with you. Had you presented this any other way, I might have come helped you. However, you decided to present this by being a complete asshole about it. Moose is fantastic and you're doing it a great disservice by being a giant cockmaster. So, this occasional-core-contributor has the following to say: die in a fire. -- sungo http://sungo.us signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Porting POE to Moose
On Apr 27, 2009, at 5:53 PM, Evan Carroll wrote: Dear POE, I'm sick of pulling my hair out because of your 1989 coding practice. I've begun packing your bags to send you to Moose-landville. My goal is to totally deprive you of blessed arrays, and closures in new. I personal yearn for the day when you lack the confusing nonsense that gives you your identity. The problem is other modules don't look like you for a reason -- you're ugly. I assume you also intend to deprive POE of its high level of performance?
