[11007] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 4607 Volume: 8
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Sat Jan 9 18:07:21 1999
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 99 15:01:29 -0800
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Sat, 9 Jan 1999 Volume: 8 Number: 4607
Today's topics:
Re: Perl Criticism topmind@technologist.com
Re: Perl Criticism topmind@technologist.com
Re: Perl Criticism <gellyfish@btinternet.com>
Re: Perl Criticism topmind@technologist.com
Re: Perl Criticism topmind@technologist.com
Re: Perl Criticism topmind@technologist.com
Re: Perl Criticism topmind@technologist.com
Re: Perl Criticism topmind@technologist.com
Re: Perl Criticism topmind@technologist.com
Re: Perl Criticism topmind@technologist.com
Re: Perl Criticism topmind@technologist.com
Re: Perl Criticism <gellyfish@btinternet.com>
Re: Perl Criticism topmind@technologist.com
Re: Perl Criticism <gellyfish@btinternet.com>
Re: Perl within Perl <eugene@snailgem.org>
stat() atime/mtime/ctime on Win95? (Michael Schilli)
Re: Uploading PC files works - but not Mac files <design@raincloud-studios.com>
Using XS with C++ and inheritance <chloe_fung@hotmail.com>
Way to measure memory / performance hits of script? <design@raincloud-studios.com>
Web Based E-mail service in Perl? <tazz@stones.com>
Re: Why Is Perl not a Language? <design@raincloud-studios.com>
Special: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 12 Dec 98 (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 20:52:58 GMT
From: topmind@technologist.com
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778fja$trh$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
In article <369687C1.7F6C9A58@atrieva.com>,
Jerome O'Neil <jeromeo@atrieva.com> wrote:
> Jonathan Stowe wrote:
>
> > Just for interest I Deja'd the self-styled 'topmind' and I think that a
> > quick glance at :
> >
> > <URL:http://www.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=366872046>
> > might help us just to get a flavour before we killfile him.
>
> This guy is too danged amusing to killfile. He's like one of those
> blow-up clowns that just keeps getting back up.
>
Because I am FRICKEN RIGHT!!!
Nobody ever really countered my OOP criticism. They simply insulted
me personally or chewed me out for "not keeping the faith
that OOP will ONE DAY pay off when average programmers learn
it better."
Nobody cited any peer-reviewed, objective study that
showed OOP was better. Only train-hoping self-proclaimed
gurus (Which some have accused me of being. If true,
that makes us even.)
-tmind-
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 21:06:37 GMT
From: topmind@technologist.com
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778gcs$ufi$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
In article <394sq15r2v.fsf@ibnets.com>,
Uri Guttman <uri@ibnets.com> wrote:
> >>>>> "JS" == Jonathan Stowe <gellyfish@btinternet.com> writes:
>
> JS> Just for interest I Deja'd the self-styled 'topmind' and I think
> JS> that a quick glance at :
>
> JS> <URL:http://www.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=366872046>
>
> JS> might help us just to get a flavour before we killfile him.
>
> or just table him. he likes to go to extremes. table oriented
> programming sounds like a real loser. imagine a relational database and
> rows storing code. or programming in excel in the large!
>
I do not use spreadsheets. But managers love them. That
alone may make Control Tables take off.
Since the alternative is discusting one-demensional
"comb code", Control Tables have a great chance.
> nightmares on nightmares!
>
> he needs to go back to school (if he ever went there) to study (not
> browse but study) other computer languages. maybe he really wants cobol
> and its fun style. almost no symbols, plenty of words and losts of table
> support with records and ISAM! PL/I would be too much for him.
Where did I ever say anything about ISAM? You are spreading falsehoods.
>
> and we have yet to see a proposal from him on this super syntax/semantic
> table language. if all he does is steal ideas from other languages
> without years of public design forums, he will just do what he
> deplores. oh well, another computer hypocrit bytes (sic) the dust.
What public design forums? Most existing languages were
created on whims. Perl was an ad-hoc OS stat report maker.
>
> looks like we have a new reese on our hands. place you bets on how long
> this thread will take to die. will our fair protagonist ever take
> another deep breath? will the overwhelming forces of perl and good win
> out over this evil troll? stay tuned, same bat group, same bat channel!
>
...when managers realize all those hit-and-run Perl hackers generated
nothing but spehgetti code that requires a $120 per hour consultant
to figuire out, then Perl will be tossed away, known as the
language that made Goto's look good.
@_(-->$/(.)/up/Your*$s\\|>you&%!$@#crypt=++||#@tol<>>??logists!@#
> uri
>
> --
> Uri Guttman Hacking Perl for Ironbridge Networks
"Hacking Perl" is redundant BTW.
> uri@sysarch.com uri@ironbridgenetworks.com
>
-tmind-
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jan 1999 21:37:32 -0000
From: Jonathan Stowe <gellyfish@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778i6s$dr$1@gellyfish.btinternet.com>
On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 20:52:58 GMT topmind@technologist.com wrote:
> In article <369687C1.7F6C9A58@atrieva.com>,
> Jerome O'Neil <jeromeo@atrieva.com> wrote:
>>
>> This guy is too danged amusing to killfile. He's like one of those
>> blow-up clowns that just keeps getting back up.
>>
>
> Because I am FRICKEN RIGHT!!!
>
I think that you missed a comma out there Mr Fricken.
> Nobody ever really countered my OOP criticism. They simply insulted
> me personally or chewed me out for "not keeping the faith
> that OOP will ONE DAY pay off when average programmers learn
> it better."
>
No nobody ever countered your OOP criticism because it, as is your criticism
of Perl, was based in your ignorant prejudice and your blinkered view
of the way that language (and conceptual) development occurs in the
real world, there is no countering arguments such as yours because your
argument like Jerome say is just like 'one of those blow-up clowns that
just keeps getting back up'. *We* could read you the entire Perl manual
and all of the transactions on the p5p mailing list and you'd still be
spouting your ridiculous objections to the way that Perl has been developed.
> Nobody cited any peer-reviewed, objective study that
> showed OOP was better.
Consider your views about Perl to have been peer reviewed.
> Only train-hoping self-proclaimed
> gurus (Which some have accused me of being. If true,
> that makes us even.)
>
I dont understand what you are talking about Mr Fricken.
/J\
--
Jonathan Stowe <jns@btinternet.com>
Some of your questions answered:
<URL:http://www.btinternet.com/~gellyfish/resources/wwwfaq.htm>
Hastings: <URL:http://www.newhoo.com/Regional/UK/England/East_Sussex/Hastings>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 21:17:41 GMT
From: topmind@technologist.com
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778h1j$v6b$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
> ....
> Uh.. yeah, that's it... :-) have you considered any of the advantages
> and flexibility with Perl at all?
I have said it has some good ideas. It is like the Bill Clinton
of programming languages. It has some good ideas and is quite
good at some things, but it has INTEGRETITY PROBLEMS.
> This is why I say you're flaming. Why
> ask all those questions that you seem to know the answer to. Apparently
> Perl is a huge waste of time, in your opinion. Perl is a very easy to
> comprehend, if you bother to learn it (and are capable).
Comprehension is not my major complaint. Abusability is.
You should have known that if you have been following.
Programmers are not altruistic--they don't give flying
fudge about who has to maintain and fiquire out their
software. Therefore, the language has to protect the
future because programmers wont.
What to you mean by "know the answer to"? I don't follow.
>
> > Oh oh, I sounded too sarcastic and flamey in that paragraph. Hmmm...
> > delete it or endure the fire..... Oh well, bring it on boys (or girls).
>
> Bring _what_ on?.. Oh right, you're not flaming though. :-)
Sure, I flame back, but never purposely start it. (I think
I had this conversation with my 3rd grade teacher. Dejavue.)
>
> >
> > >
> > > Bart.
> > >
> >
-tmind-
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6888/langopts.htm
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 21:29:55 GMT
From: topmind@technologist.com
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778hoh$vom$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
In article <369f2d41.10035950@news.skynet.be>,
bart.lateur@skynet.be (Bart Lateur) wrote:
> topmind@technologist.com wrote:
>
> >I have received a dozen language recommendations, but you are the 3rd person
> >to recommend Python. Maybe the next time at the book store I look more.
>
> There is a book out about Python, yes. But if they don't carry it, you
> can just download Python, including dozens of sample codes, and try it
> out for free.
>
> I think that, apart from TCL, Python is the main competitor to Perl, for
> their typical application areas.
>
> >> Let the Perl people have their syntactic abusabilty. It is by design.
> >> Really. Most seem to like it that way.
> >
> >Of course! It is job security. Only they can fix their own spehgetti,
> >so they are called back with a pay hike.
>
> For that, locking the source away would be simpler. But Perl people, in
> particular the "leaders", want to give the client what he pays for: the
> source. They want to be asked back because they're *good*, not because
> they've hostaged him. Most clients hate feeling like a hostage, so they
> really appreciate this. That's part of what the whole "free software"
> thing is about.
I have nothing against open source. But that is a seperate and
independant issue. You make it sound like its "Perl or Proprietary,
therefore Perl is better." That aint the issue.
>
> Anyway.
>
> It looks like orthogonality is mainly what you're after (= "apply the
> same rules everywhere"). Python is designed to be far more orthogonal
> than Perl.
>
> But, it seems like some programmers may be far more productive by not
> following a strictly orthogonal approach. Larry Wall himself said
> something like "orthogonality is largely overrated". After all, matching
> using a regexes is not quite the same as toggling a bit in a hardware
> card, not even mentally. So why should it look the same?
Writing code that the next guy cannot figure out is not "productivity".
It may make the original programmer LOOK good and the
followon guy LOOK back, but that is superficial productivity.
I challenged someone to show me why Perl's power cannot be
cleaned up without significant (initial) productivity loss.
I have not seen any yet.
>
> Many people say "use the right tool for the right job". Perl tries to be
> many tools in one. Each tool has it's own incompatible (with the rest)
> syntax, because it looks like the best syntax for that job.
>
> A final remark: don't try to make the designer change Perl because you
> don't like it. You may have valid reasons for not liking it. Others feel
> the same. That's why there have already been designed literally hunderds
> of programming languages. Many are freely available. Check the "free
> compilers" list, which is accessible through internet (I think on a
> Swiss site; I think Yahoo has a link). It may be that your one true love
> (programmerwise) is in there. After all, it's not because very many
> people use Perl, that you should too.
>
> Bart.
>
My goal is not to find the obsure, un-resume-able language,
but to promote a good common standard that does not have
the stupidity of the past.
Perl is fine for ad-hoc emmergancy programming, but not
for long-term applications that must be read and changed
by many.
-tmind-
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6888/
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 21:48:10 GMT
From: topmind@technologist.com
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778iqp$ng$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
In article <slrn79b6bn.mcd.dformosa@godzilla.zeta.org.au>,
dformosa@zeta.org.au (David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)) wrote:
> In article <773fud$n5h$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, topmind@technologist.com wrote:
> >Reply to Jerome O'Neil's 1/6 message:
>
> [...]
>
> >>> What particular operators would you have rewritten into functions? <<
> >
> >How about |, cmp, $_, @_, >>, &=
> >to name a few. (@_ should be chucked altogether, but why couldn't it be a
> >function anyhow? Why a fricken symbol?)
>
> Why should I be forced to do all the extra typing? @_ is a verable.
> If you like you can think of it as a function that takes no
> arguemtents.
Strange, OOP people chew me out for factoring in typing time AT ALL.
What a contrast.
However, I am suggesting getting rid of X_ altother. They'r too
risky in the hands of idiots. If you want to feed the results
of one command to another, do it like this:
t = funca()
t = funcb(t)
t = funcc(t)
t = funcd(t)
or as someone pointed out: ...funcb(funca())
It is easier to figure out where it is going and where
it came from.
>
> [...]
>
> >>> What part of the strict pragma does not satisfy your needs? my() and
local
> >() are well documented. <<
> >
> >For one, there is no direct passing by value (or read-only) designated by the
> >routine; second, there is no way to make the scope of an entire routine
> >"isolated". (Why should I have to localize 20 variables when I could just
> >localize an entire routine?)
>
> If you are passing in 20 verables into a function then there is
> something wrong with your design.
No no no no! 20 LOCAL Variables. Why have a list like this:
local(foo, bar, smoo, smar, fart, tart, bla, bra)
When all you need is one keyword, "isolate". It also saves typing P-)
>
> >>> I consider any language that does not return a value from an assignment
> >broken. If it's the rvalue, that's a Good Thing. <<
> >
> >What is your criteria for stating that? Because you are just plain
> >used to it?
>
> Because he (like me) has found it to be usefull. Not just in while
> tests (as you describe) but in if then stanemts, the map operator and
> a number of other contexts.
>
Show me a good real-world example.
> [...]
>
> >>>... belies the fact that you have no idea how subroutines operate in perl.
> >How perl handles parameters is well defined and documented. <<
> >
> >Perl routines can put the result into unstated results and another routine
can
> >use that unstated result as
> >a parameter or parameter-like mechanism. is this NOT true????????
>
> This is true, however unstated results are commen in langages that
> permit multiple vales to be returned from a function.
Why not just use a subroutine with parameters by reference?
Why have 10 different ways to do things. It might save
30% typing, but results in programs that are 300%
harder to read. (Perhaps you see this as an exeration,
but readability (maintanability) is a HUGE cost for
companies.)
It is not how fast you can crap, but how easy it is
to manage the result. (Yuk!)
>
> --
> Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
> http://www.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
> How to win arguments on usenet http://www.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/usenet.html
>
-tmind-
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6888/langopts.htm
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 21:53:38 GMT
From: topmind@technologist.com
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778j52$rn$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
In article <slrn79e3nq.sgo.dformosa@godzilla.zeta.org.au>,
dformosa@zeta.org.au (David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)) wrote:
> In article <775phs$n4b$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, topmind@technologist.com wrote:
> >In article <slrn79addn.mcd.dformosa@godzilla.zeta.org.au>,
> > dformosa@zeta.org.au (David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)) wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> Ok how do you diffrentuate a scripting languge from a nonscriptiong
langage?
>
> [...]
>
> >There are no clear boundries, but most agree that the distinctions
> >are useful for discussion and classification. Here is a quick rough
> >attempted list of scripting characteristics:
> >
> >1. Partially or fully interpreted.
> >
> >2. Loose typing
> >
> >3. Not meant for making mass-distribution apps, fast math,
> >OS building, and life-support operations.
> >
> >4. Often have good string-processing capabilities.
>
> Under your rules elisp is a scripting lang, and perl + PDL would not
> be a scripting lang.
I am not familar with Elisp or PDL, so I cannot comment.
However, why is everyone getting so into this scripting
definition thing? It is not something I was focusing on
when this mess started. It is like comming in to talk about
country music, when an argument breaks out about whether
John Cougar Mellancamf (sp) is a country singer or not.
I am not interested in John Cougar's classification.
>
> --
> Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
> http://www.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
> How to win arguments on usenet http://www.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/usenet.html
>
>
-tmind-
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6888/langopts.htm
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 21:57:39 GMT
From: topmind@technologist.com
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778jci$16h$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
In article <slrn79adli.mcd.dformosa@godzilla.zeta.org.au>,
dformosa@zeta.org.au (David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)) wrote:
> In article <773a7v$ivj$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, topmind@technologist.com wrote:
> >In article <comdog-ya02408000R0601991921420001@news.panix.com>,
> > comdog@computerdog.com (brian d foy) wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >I am not so much attacking Perl as pointing out what seems
> >good about it and what stinks so that future language builders
> >can avoid mistakes, or at least are AWARE of the alternatives
> >before preceding.
>
> I think that you should have done a little bit of study into languge
> thory. At least enougth to use the correct terms for a number of the
> features/options.
>
Language design is more about Pshycology than math. After all,
computer languages are an INTERFACE between humans and computers.
It is the HUMAN side that is the tough part.
-tmind-
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6888/
> --
> Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
> http://www.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
> How to win arguments on usenet http://www.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/usenet.html
>
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 22:03:02 GMT
From: topmind@technologist.com
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778jml$1b7$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
In article <yzhsbtk9y2xj.fsf@netcom15.netcom.com>,
UG <mcampbel@netcom.com> wrote:
> topmind@technologist.com writes:
>
> > >> What I'm saying is the leeky approch is the correct one, you may not
> > like it but it is so usefull that it is neccery. <<
> >
> > Correct One!????
> > Show me an example of where it is so indespensable!!!
>
> $counter = $index = $how_many_have_I_seen = 0;
>
How about this for initialization:
Store 0 to counter, index, how_many, etc.
It comes from a real language.
It can even be done with a function.
Init(0, counter, index, how_many, etc.)
(How to process an infinite number of parameters
makes for some interesting thinking.)
No need to introduce leaky assigments and their related
headaches to initialize stuff.
Keep it Clean AND Fast!
-tmind-
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6888/langopts.htm
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 22:08:32 GMT
From: topmind@technologist.com
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778k10$1na$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
In article <777puv$ot$1@gellyfish.btinternet.com>,
Jonathan Stowe <gellyfish@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Jan 1999 18:13:46 GMT topmind@technologist.com wrote:
> >
> > The type of OS people work on depends mostly on circumstances
> > not controlled by them. Since it is tough to switch sub-specialties
> > in IT, most end up using what their college or first employer
> > used.
> >
>
> Absolute rubbish, if this was true then I would still be programming for
> CP/M or what have you and many of my colleagues would still be using
> Arthur and would be looking at the dole queue as they hauled the last ICL
> mainframe out of the door.
>
> Infact as far as it goes I would suggest that a characteristic of a
> *good* programmer is an ability to adapt to circumstance as required -
> if this were not true then the dole queues would be full of people who
> had, shall we say, dBase III programming as their primary skill.
>
Being able to learn new stuff and being able to get new positions
are too different things. I am a fast learner, but hireers
judge one by PAID resume experience, not what is actually between
your ears. My friends told me to outright lie. That was how
THEY switched.
Anyhow, you have not shown any triag mechanism that distributes
good programmers to Unix and the bad ones to Windows.
-tmind-
> For the majority of people here Perl is not their first programming
> language or perhaps even second or third or more.
>
> It could be suggested that programming is a 'sub-speciality in IT' as there
> are many other categories of employment within the industry. Many people
> switch between 'Operator','Programmer','Analyst','Trainer','Administrator'
> regularly as the exigencies of the employment market require.
>
> /J\
> --
> Jonathan Stowe <jns@btinternet.com>
> Some of your questions answered:
> <URL:http://www.btinternet.com/~gellyfish/resources/wwwfaq.htm>
> Hastings: <URL:http://www.newhoo.com/Regional/UK/England/East_Sussex/Hastings>
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 22:14:04 GMT
From: topmind@technologist.com
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778kbb$1rs$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
In article <3696A757.E2AE40D4@mediaone.net>,
"Michael D. Schleif" <mds-resource@mediaone.net> wrote:
> At last, a taker }:-^
>
> topmind@technologist.com wrote:
> >
> > As poined out in a nearby message, most of us prefer to
> > classify movies and music even though there is no clear
> > dividing line between them.
> >
> > Imperfect classifications are often better than no
> > classifications. Classifications are a tool.
> > Just because we don't have an exact equation does
> > not mean the tool is not useful.
>
> But, persuade me of your usefulness . . .
>
> > > This is my absolute favorite unreasonable assertion }:-^
> > >
> > > The blind cannot see, therefore seeing is not possible.
> > > My neighbor's newborn infant cannot drive my car, therefore my car
> > > cannot be driven.
> > > I do not know how to fly, therefore it is not possible for anybody to
> > > travel to the stars.
> >
> > I don't understand this sarcasm. Does it relate to something I said?
>
> < returned to context ;->
> >
> > 1. Very tough to mix arrays and scalars unless you have only one array at
the end of the list.
> >
> > 2. "Getting used to" means it is tougher to learn, with little benefits in
return.
> >
> > 3. There is no simple mechanism for passing by-value.
>
> I really do find it amusing that, somebody with *no* substantive
> experience in a language, is so vocal about its complexity. If it is
> too difficult for you to use, what is so difficult about moving
> elsewhere?
>
> Seriously, please, present your alternative language so that we may be
> amazed or continue our amusement }:-^
>
Is my 85k webpage not enough detail on my suggestions?
Anyhow, you seem to be implying that my lack of ability
to figure out your vague, subtle sarcasm is somehow
reflective of my technical knowlege.
I would like to see the studies that prove such a correlation.
Perhaps Perl programmers are as cryptic in their insults as
they are in their code.
Worst Regards,
-tmind-
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6888/
> --
>
> Best Regards,
>
> mds
> mds resource
> 888.250.3987
>
> "Dare to fix things before they break . . . "
>
> "Our capacity for understanding is inversely proportional to how much we
> think we know. The more I know, the more I know I don't know . . . "
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jan 1999 22:39:28 -0000
From: Jonathan Stowe <gellyfish@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778lr0$jb$1@gellyfish.btinternet.com>
On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 21:29:55 GMT topmind@technologist.com wrote:
>
> Perl is fine for ad-hoc emmergancy programming, but not
> for long-term applications that must be read and changed
> by many.
>
I cant believe that you have the gall to make such a ludicrous statement
as that (actually looking back at this thread I can see how you might
have ) - do you have *any* idea what you are talking about ? You have
made ridiculous claims regarding research right through this thread and
now you make a claim that demonstrates perfectly that you probably havent
even looked at a *single* resource to discover to what purposes Perl is
put. Perl is used for things that you probably havent got the slightest
idea about - I would like you to look at the history of the module CGI.pm
and its predecessor cgi-lib.pl and I would like you to take note of what
areas their respective authors were working in. I and many other people
here no doubt would also like you to come into work with them on monday
morning to see how Perl is enabling them to deliver critical services
to hundreds of thousands of customers everyday.
I would suggest that you have neither developed nor maintained a working
system otherwise you wouldnt continue to raise these pathetic objections
to a programming language that enables thousands of programmers to do
just that.
/J\
--
Jonathan Stowe <jns@btinternet.com>
Some of your questions answered:
<URL:http://www.btinternet.com/~gellyfish/resources/wwwfaq.htm>
Hastings: <URL:http://www.newhoo.com/Regional/UK/England/East_Sussex/Hastings>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 22:28:06 GMT
From: topmind@technologist.com
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778l5l$2nb$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
In article <36961899.4AC48014@perspex.com>,
Tripp Lilley <tripp.lilley@perspex.com> wrote:
> topmind@technologist.com wrote:
>
> > 1. Very tough to mix arrays and scalars unless you have only one array at
the
> > end of the list.
>
> &foo $zero, $one, $two, [ @three ], $four, [ @five ], $six;
>
> sub foo {
> my( $zero, $one, $two, $three, $four, $five, $six ) = @_;
> #...
> }
>
> or, if you prefer to not use refs
>
> sub foo {
> my( $zero, $one, $two, $four, $six ) = @_[0, 1, 2, 4, 6];
> my @three = @{$_[3]};
> my @five = @{$_[5]}
> #...;
> }
>
I still find it ugly.
> > 2. "Getting used to" means it is tougher to learn, with little benefits in
> > return.
>
> This is opinion. I found it tough to learn Perl. I found it the most god-
awful,
> ugly, inconsistent, not-like-anything-I-was-taught-a-good-language-should-be
> language I had ever encountered. Then I spent a 48 or 72 hour stretch with it
in
> the midst of a very thorny problem that I /had/ to solve /then/, no
exceptions. It
> saved my butt. I decided to take a second look at why I loved it and why I
hated
> it.
>
> I can't give you the specific point/counterpoint answers you want because
that is
> precisely /why/ I love Perl. It's /not/ mechanistic. It is a programming
language
> for intelligent, thoughtful, conscientious humans. Thus, like natural
languages, it
> can be approached rigorously or not, depending on your tastes. I could write
to you
> in a perfectly mechanistic, predictable prose that anyone would be able to
> "maintain", and you would choke on reading it every time!
>
> I'm reminded of those who gag on Shakespeare, Blake, Byron, because they don't
> "just say what it is they're saying". What this perspective misses (and what
defies
> analysis) is that they /do/ say what they're saying, /and so much more/.
Witness
> the direct, clearly comprehensible, and utterly maintable phrase:
>
> "Juliet, you're very beautiful..."
>
> Now, an admittedly indirect, but /far/ more expressive statement of the same
> fundamental concept:
>
> But, soft! what light through yonder window breaks?
> It is the east, and Juliet is the sun.
> Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon,
> Who is already sick and pale with grief,
> That thou her maid art far more fair than she:
>
So you are saying that you cannot explain why Perl is so great?
It has to be experienced?
The OOP people are saying that same thing.
I have at least tried to explain to others what I like about
table-oriented programming at my website.
If somebody studied it enough,
I think they would get much of the idea.
Perhaps what works for one does not work for the other.
I my mind I organize problems and logic into tables. Others may
organization them into streams, objects, GUI clicks, etc.
However, there is still the issue of maintanability.
> Now, I can accept that you might not find this appealing. I'm not going to
stop you
> from being less powerful than I. As another has suggested, you might like
Python,
> or one of a number of other languages. And I'm not going to go
point/counterpoint
> with you, because Perl is not that for me. Perl fits me, it doesn't fit you.
Leave
> it. It won't miss you any more than music misses Salieri in the wake of
Mozart.
>
> > Optional = stupid programmers will overuse it and stick SOMEBODY ELSE with
the
> > mess! Hit and run programming.
>
> You should be firing these stupid programmers and erasing signs of their
existence.
> This is not to be taken lightly. If you find gifted but inexperienced
programmers,
> you should keep them, and help them understand how to write elegant, flexible,
> extensible, maintainable code. All are possible in Perl (as in any language)
with a
> good programmer.
>
> Do not blame the language for the faults of the speaker.
WRONGO!
I strongly disagree with this statement. From a manager's
perspective (which I am not), you have to pick a language that
will give you the best results based on how a typical employee
interacts with it. (Unless you have the uncanny ability
to weed out idiots.)
If people keep tipping their light SUV's because they are lousy
drivers, then perhaps SUV's should be taken off the
market, even though the accidents were because of
stupid driving.
You have to consider the WHOLE environment of a language,
NOT just its POTENTIAL under ideal conditions.
The world is full of idiots and con-artists. Languages
should take that into consideration.
>
> "Successful software production is much more like producing a film than
harvesting
> a crop. It is a cooperative undertaking involving a number of highly
specialized,
> very talented people. It is the artistic quality of this kind of synergy that
makes
> a great film and it is the artistic quality of this kind of synergy that
makes a
> great piece of technology".
>
> William Beckett, _Metamorphosis: A Programmer Looks at the Software Crisis_
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0966033396/perspeximagework/
>
>
-tmind-
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6888/
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jan 1999 23:05:53 -0000
From: Jonathan Stowe <gellyfish@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Perl Criticism
Message-Id: <778nch$kp$1@gellyfish.btinternet.com>
On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 22:08:32 GMT topmind@technologist.com wrote:
> In article <777puv$ot$1@gellyfish.btinternet.com>,
> Jonathan Stowe <gellyfish@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 08 Jan 1999 18:13:46 GMT topmind@technologist.com wrote:
>> >
>> > The type of OS people work on depends mostly on circumstances
>> > not controlled by them. Since it is tough to switch sub-specialties
>> > in IT, most end up using what their college or first employer
>> > used.
>> >
>>
>> Infact as far as it goes I would suggest that a characteristic of a
>> *good* programmer is an ability to adapt to circumstance as required -
>> if this were not true then the dole queues would be full of people who
>> had, shall we say, dBase III programming as their primary skill.
>>
>
> Anyhow, you have not shown any triag mechanism that distributes
> good programmers to Unix and the bad ones to Windows.
>
Nor did I assert that there was such a mechanism. As far as I can
determine there are good programmers working on any platform that one might
care to mention. For myself I have worked with AS/400,CP/M,DOS,Windows,
VME,Unix what more can I say ? There is no such external mechanism but the
individuals preferences and maybe the better programmers would prefer to
work with an environment, Unix, that supports them better but I would
doubt if many would assert this point too keenly.
I have this feeling that you have been shafted in your work experience and
now feel that you must take it out on the community of programmers - if I
am correct then I would suggest that you seek the kind of professional
help that this newsgroup is unable to offer.
/J\
od
--
Jonathan Stowe <jns@btinternet.com>
Some of your questions answered:
<URL:http://www.btinternet.com/~gellyfish/resources/wwwfaq.htm>
Hastings: <URL:http://www.newhoo.com/Regional/UK/England/East_Sussex/Hastings>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 17:03:40 -0500
From: Eugene Sotirescu <eugene@snailgem.org>
Subject: Re: Perl within Perl
Message-Id: <3697D23C.6ABF927C@snailgem.org>
backslashxt@yahoo.com wrote:
> I have a script which displays a banner at the top of the page (rotating
> banners) and it works fine. However, in a postcard script I'm working on, I
> need to include the banner at the top of each page. But I can't seem to be
> able to make the call to the banner script work when called from the postcard
> script, it only displays the tag to the HTML file.
>
> The call I'm using:
> print "<!--\#exec cgi=\"/cgi-bin/topad.cgi\"--> \n"; (Calls banner)
>
> I've tried quite a few things here and there, and it always gets pasted as
> html code. I've done it before where the topad.cgi would be loaded even when
> called from another script but I don't remember how. Any help appreciated.
Does the server you're working on support exec in SSIs?
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jan 1999 21:35:57 GMT
From: schilli@tep.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de. (Michael Schilli)
Subject: stat() atime/mtime/ctime on Win95?
Message-Id: <778i3t$n25$1@sparcserver.lrz-muenchen.de>
I find the behaviour of stat() under Win95 somewhat confusing, anyone can
shed any light on this?
On Unix, the structure returned contains
8 atime last access time since the epoch
9 mtime last modify time since the epoch
10 ctime inode change time (NOT creation time!) since the epo
whereas on Win95 I find
atime Sat Jan 9 00:00:00 1999
mtime Sat Jan 9 13:19:14 1999
ctime Sat Jan 9 13:19:13 1999
for a file that has been created around 13:19:13 and has been read several
times since then.
Schwartz/Olsen/Christiansen's "Lerning Perl on Win32 Systems" states that
ctime is the file creation time -- can that be true?
Anybody knows what Win95 actually stores on its file system? Is that different
from the structure Win98 or NT 4.0 or NT 5.0 use?
Would be great if anybody could provide help.
-- Mike
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jan 1999 22:21:38 GMT
From: "Charles R. Thompson" <design@raincloud-studios.com>
Subject: Re: Uploading PC files works - but not Mac files
Message-Id: <778kpi$oqi@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>
>I'm working on a project were we uploads files using a browser.
>I have made a perl program which receives the files from the html form.
>All
>this works perfect when dealing with PC files, but when uploading Mac
>files
>the Resource Fork part is missing (a Mac file consist of a Resource
Fork
>and a Data Fork).
I have no answer for you, but would like to ask something as I am doing
something similar. Does this apply to ALL Mac files? For my script, they
are only doing JPG and GIF uploads. I will eventually b e allowing
multiple file formats, so this is probably (already) going to become an
issue. About 75% of the people using my uploading script will be MAC
based, so you have me freeeeekin out now.
CT
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1999 12:07:09 +0800
From: "Chloe" <chloe_fung@hotmail.com>
Subject: Using XS with C++ and inheritance
Message-Id: <776kfm$j67$1@imsp009a.netvigator.com>
Hi all,
I have a C++ class B which inherits from class A. I have corresponding perl
modules B and A where B inherits from A. Such perl modules are used to
invoke C++ functions in their corresponding C++ counterpart class. Thus, I
have corresponding XS modules for B and A. All the stuff works fine if B
does not inherit from A such that I only call functions in the class where
they are defined. When I make B inherit from A, the compilation fails which
says "Can't load the loadable object A". However, I have added all the
object files of both A and B to the list of objects required in Makefile.PL.
Can anybody tell me what I have missed here? If you need further info, I
can provide some source code. Thanks a lot for your help.
Chloe
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jan 1999 22:11:39 GMT
From: "Charles R. Thompson" <design@raincloud-studios.com>
Subject: Way to measure memory / performance hits of script?
Message-Id: <778k6r$lir@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>
With a current project, I've developed a script on a local network then
moved the final project to the web only to find a serious performace
degredation that I know will get me hell to pay.
I've read about the benchmark module in the Camel book but am looking
for information on how to 'gauge' the performance hit my scripts are
going to generate. It's obvious it is slow... I think I would only need
to time things for optimization after this obvious bulky overhead is
stripped away. While the Cookbook gives me some great examples on proper
coding, there really doesn't seem to be anything about performance
issues (I probably overlooked it) I'm not really sure what the correct
question to ask here is, because I'm not sure what I'm really looking
for. I'll try these...
Is there any way to see what resources my Perl script demands of my
server while or after running?
Is there a maximum ballpark figure in total filesize I should shoot for
in a coding sense (including scripts, libraries, etc)?
I realize it takes what it takes to get the job done, but I'm looking
for any online resources that talk about optimization issues, etc.
Any leads?
CT
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1999 22:47:35 +0100
From: "Pim Megens" <tazz@stones.com>
Subject: Web Based E-mail service in Perl?
Message-Id: <778jc4$mqs$1@enterprise.cistron.nl>
Hi,
I want to offer my site visitors a free e-mail account like
<name>@<mypage.com>. Does anyone know if there's a Perl script available on
the www what can do this for me?
I like to hear from you soon!
Kindest regards,
P. Megens
The Netherlands
------------------------------
Date: 9 Jan 1999 22:54:51 GMT
From: "Charles R. Thompson" <design@raincloud-studios.com>
Subject: Re: Why Is Perl not a Language?
Message-Id: <778mnr$5hq@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>
nick@macaw.demon.co.uk wrote in message
<76q72v$jm2$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <3672afb3.298023@news.skynet.be>,
> bart.lateur@skynet.be (Bart Lateur) wrote:
>> Thomas Brian Holdren wrote:
>> Some points that may indicate a scripting language:
>> 1) no user interface
<shaking head > Advanced GUI really wasn't around to build the first MS
stuff. ... unless you are counting VGA :)
>Ha ha, oh the influence of Microsoft. A language, scripting or not, is
a set
>of rules defining a grammar for expressing ideas, and nothing to do
with user
>interfaces. These days to write programms most people use an editor of
some
>kind to edit the program text. Personally whether I am writing english,
C++,
>sed, sh, or programs for my own languages I usually use emacs, and this
has
>no bearing on the language I am writing.
hee hee.. I wonder how many of people think Windows was written using
Visual Basic or Visual C++. :)
CT
------------------------------
Date: 12 Dec 98 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Special: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 12 Dec 98)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
Well, after 6 months, here's the answer to the quiz: what do we do about
comp.lang.perl.moderated. Answer: nothing.
]From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
]Date: 21 Sep 1998 19:53:43 -0700
]Subject: comp.lang.perl.moderated available via e-mail
]
]It is possible to subscribe to comp.lang.perl.moderated as a mailing list.
]To do so, send mail to majordomo@eyrie.org with "subscribe clpm" in the
]body. Majordomo will then send you instructions on how to confirm your
]subscription. This is provided as a general service for those people who
]cannot receive the newsgroup for whatever reason or who just prefer to
]receive messages via e-mail.
The Perl-Users Digest is a retransmission of the USENET newsgroup
comp.lang.perl.misc. For subscription or unsubscription requests, send
the single line:
subscribe perl-users
or:
unsubscribe perl-users
to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.misc (and this Digest), send your
article to perl-users@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.announce, send your article to
clpa@perl.com.
To request back copies (available for a week or so), send your request
to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu with the command "send perl-users x.y",
where x is the volume number and y is the issue number.
The Meta-FAQ, an article containing information about the FAQ, is
available by requesting "send perl-users meta-faq". The real FAQ, as it
appeared last in the newsgroup, can be retrieved with the request "send
perl-users FAQ". Due to their sizes, neither the Meta-FAQ nor the FAQ
are included in the digest.
The "mini-FAQ", which is an updated version of the Meta-FAQ, is
available by requesting "send perl-users mini-faq". It appears twice
weekly in the group, but is not distributed in the digest.
For other requests pertaining to the digest, send mail to
perl-users-request@ruby.oce.orst.edu. Do not waste your time or mine
sending perl questions to the -request address, I don't have time to
answer them even if I did know the answer.
------------------------------
End of Perl-Users Digest V8 Issue 4607
**************************************
