Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not at all. I learned Perl from the manpages, and I'm mystified how noobs are to discover and convince themselves that "man perlobj" is now bad advice yet remains official. As for bless/Moose interop, I read somewhere there were big problems mixing the two but don't remember the specifics (I mostly dropped Perl a long time ago over its dogged attempts to guess what I probably wanted when I made a mistake). Others in…
I'm mystified how noobs are to discover and convince themselves that "man perlobj" is now bad advice yet remains official. Me too, which is one reason I'd like to remove it, or at least fix it.
Ask HN: Is Perl dead?
131–140 of 140 posts
Re: Ask HN: Is Perl dead?
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm mystified how noobs are to discover and convince themselves that "man perlobj" is now bad advice yet remains official. Me too, which is one reason I'd like to remove it, or at least fix it.
The Perl 5 world seems to change quite a lot every few years. If people have an old install, perldoc might be out of date. Wouldn't it be better to just add an URL at the top of the page to a page at perl.org and put the best practices for CPAN there?
For example, Moose has always made an effort to cooperate with the native Perl object system. The documentation in the perldoc's for object oriented programming isn't wrong. The skills you learn from perltoot and companions will transfer to Moose, you'll know how the underlying implementation works. Is this the right way to learn Perl's Object Oriented programming? That is an argument the Perl community itself is having[1]. As that argument is resolved the documentation is updated.
If you think about this in startup terms. Moose as a project is 4 years old. Would you invest in a startup that had an exit strategy that was targeted for than than 5 years? Moose has just recently (in the last year or two) reached a dominant market position when compared to the existing competition (Class::MethodMaker, Class::STD, etc) but still is adopted by only 5% of the total market (that is we have ~1K direct downstream dependencies out of about 20K distribution on CPAN). It would be premature to expect the industry to recognize let alone promote Moose as the de-facto standard. However it would be an excellent bet that sometime in the next few years that will happen.
Of the "Modern Perl" distributions out there Moose is one of the most consolidated in it's scope. Things like Catalyst have been gaining new competition (Dancer, Mojolicious) in their respective markets. It's interesting to watch things that appear to my untrained eye like market forces play out across the adoption of various CPAN modules.
To circle back around, perl documentation needs to strike a careful balance between what they can guarantee exists (bless $ref, __PACKAGE__) and what the community accepts as best practice (use Moose;). The documentation needs to intentionally be less dynamic than the fashions of the community. It must be conservative enough to provide continuity so that someone who happens to be on a perl-5.8.8 box (released 3 months before Moose, and still the standard on RHEL if I recall) doesn't learn a whole different set of "best practice" modules than someone on a 5.10.1 box. It does however need to be updated as things like Moose take over the mind share and prove themselves out. When only 1 in 20 modules you run into will likely involve Moose, you'll still need to understand the native solutions. When that ratio changes, the balance will need to change too.
[1]: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/980751/should-i-learn-per...
Re: Ask HN: Is Perl dead?
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not at all. I learned Perl from the manpages, and I'm mystified how noobs are to discover and convince themselves that "man perlobj" is now bad advice yet remains official. As for bless/Moose interop, I read somewhere there were big problems mixing the two but don't remember the specifics (I mostly dropped Perl a long time ago over its dogged attempts to guess what I probably wanted when I made a mistake). Others in…
>>I learned Perl from the manpages Well, that was impressive. Stupid, but impressive... :-) >>discover and convince themselves that "man perlobj" is now bad advice yet remains official. AGAIN: Those man pages doesn't discuss CPAN modules. But afaik, they recommend books and the web...
In this case, neither perlobj, perlboot, nor perlbot mention any CPAN modules at all, and perltoot cites a couple but Moose isn't among them.
Re: Ask HN: Is Perl dead?
#134Re: Ask HN: Is Perl dead?
#135Perl launched to fame by being able to talk to a bunch of databases and being easily (for the time) bindable to binary libraries, as well as having great low level access to the OS, as well as being a direct upgrade path for sed, awk, bash, csh and so on. Now people don't care about upgrading old shell scripts and don't understand awk's idioms, sadly -- everyone wants yet another C, and every other language talks to the various databases and binds to C libraries just as well plus have better toolkits for creating games.
Perl 5 is dead in the sense that COBOL is dead: all of the work is maintenance work; there are no entry level or intermediate positions; experts can still find work and will be able to for a long time.
Perl 6 does lots of great stuff but that alone isn't enough. Without a PyGame, Rack, and lots of other pieces, it's just a neat language design. Whether Perl 6 kicks ass very much still depends on where people take it. In a very real sense, Perl 6's success depends on me. I need to port Continuity to it (and its native coroutines!). I need to take more features from Seaside and show them off. I need to play with SDL stuff and make good abstractions. Busy, busy, busy!
-scott
Re: Ask HN: Is Perl dead?
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
In 2008? I can think of other explanations for a drop in hiring around then.
Hey, wasn't that the year the economy started to go south? .... Obviously, people stopped employing people in Perl, and the economy took a steep dive because of it!. Use Perl! Save the economy!. ( nb. for people with no sense of humour, this was a stab at people who don't understand that correlation != causation )
Re: Ask HN: Is Perl dead?
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Perl 5 world seems to change quite a lot every few years. If people have an old install, perldoc might be out of date. Wouldn't it be better to just add an URL at the top of the page to a page at perl.org and put the best practices for CPAN there?
The question is should the documentation shipped with perl document the features available with that distribution, or should it document the features available in the wider Perl culture? For example, Moose has always made an effort to cooperate with the native Perl object system. The documentation in the perldoc's for object oriented programming isn't wrong. The skills you learn from perltoot and companions will tran…
A really well argued way of agreeing with my point that perldoc pages should start with a reference to e.g. a page on perl.org with the present best practices for that perldoc page? :-)
Or maybe as close as possible to get of a formal proof? :-)
>>[Moose] still is adopted by only 5% [of CPAN] [..] It would be premature to expect the industry to recognize let alone promote Moose as the de-facto standard.
The counter argument is that new work generally seems to use Moose. But, of course, new work use the CPAN modules.
Re: Ask HN: Is Perl dead?
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perl 5 came out in 1994, Ruby came out in 1995, Python came out in 1991. (Sources: Wikipedia)
Perls 1-4 are even older (Perl 1 was 1987). Perl 5 really is just another version number of Perl, not a new language entirely like Perl 6. Oftentimes what matters is exposure more than when something was invented. Erlang and Haskell came out in 1986 and 1990, respectively, but they're newer to most people than Perl is. Ruby and Python didn't have the exposure in 1995 and 1991 that Perl had. (Interesting thought exper…
Perl 5 added lexically scoped variables ("my"), in addition to Perl 4's dynamicly scoped variables ("local"). Perl 5 added references, which is what made OO Perl possible (either "traditional" blessed hash references, or Moose, or any of the less popular alternatives, like "inside-out" objects).
I suspect the programming language rage of 2020 is currently some highschool kid's pet project (or some elementary school kid's daydream?) which no one else has seen yet.
Re: Ask HN: Is Perl dead?
#139Re: Ask HN: Is Perl dead?
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Feel free to vote me down, if you're all about karma... :-) I asked because his claim went against what I've read on the subject. I don't really know, since I haven't really been working with web development for a couple of years (which is why I started with " Interesting ").
I'll vote you down for calling me he. ;)