Perl is 26 Today • Hacker News Board

Re: Perl is 26 Today

#151

Post by Mithaldu » Thu, Dec 19, 2013, 7:36 PM UTC

per06a2 wrote: post #148

ChuckMcM wrote: post #107

So when I went to Google I learned Python. I enjoyed the language and used it a lot, it has a solid support base and pretty much anything you wanted to do you could import a module to do it. When I went to Blekko they were a perl shop, which was a bit intimidating at first, but after programming in it for nearly 4 years now I find I can get from concept to first test faster in Perl than I could in Python. And I hadn'…

I can't stand perl's philosophy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There%27s_more_than_one_way_to_... Contrast with Python's philosophy: https://wiki.python.org/moin/TOOWTDI Python's philosophy may be limiting for some people, but I'd rather have code that I have a decent chance of reading and understanding the run-time behavior of than a language that encourages extreme personalization. The whole parsing thing doesn't he…

I'd rather have a language where i can look at the code and decide with a glance whether it's batshit insane or not, than a language where the best code possible looks just like the most horrible and insecure garbage. :)

Re: Perl is 26 Today

#152

Post by pasbesoin » Thu, Dec 19, 2013, 7:48 PM UTC

Mithaldu wrote: post #143

pasbesoin wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adding a bit of praise for "Programming Perl". (As well as for some of the other books by the fine people you've listed.) "Programming Perl" is not just (very) informative, it is also engagingly, even entertainingly informative. (Proof of this is left as an exercise for the reader... ;-)

Sadly, Programming Perl is a bad book for a newbie to read nowadays. http://perl-tutorial.org explains why and suggests newer alternatives. :)

Well, perhaps one can treat my comment as good part fondness/nostalgia.

Although, I clicked through the pop-up link, to find a fairly brief and limited set of points in a short, single critique of the 4th edition.

I don't know... It's been a while, but I still remember "Programming Perl" as providing not just the what but a good dose of "why" and context.

A lot of people who "don't like Perl" don't seem to understand that, where it's coming from, both philosophically and systematically (if that is a word and I can use it here).

"Programming Perl" is not, in my opinion, a beginner text. Randal took care of that contemporaneously with "Learning Perl". But it was, and -- current shortcomings aside -- perhaps still is, a good post-beginner text.

It also remains "timeless" for me, in that it was a good, engaging read. In my opinion, more texts should -- if clever enough to -- dialog with the reader rather than spewing at them.

Anyway, I don't mean to put myself in the position of defending Larry et al.'s tomb in this post-post-modern world. I'm hardly qualified to begin such a task.

But even if it's not currently the best reference, or even recommended as such, I think it may remain a decent example of how to write one.

Re: Perl is 26 Today

#153

Post by rikacomet » Thu, Dec 19, 2013, 7:52 PM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #142

rikacomet wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

whats so bad about CGI, even after FCGI?

The world has moved on, we've got more sane abstractions. PSGI[1][2] (modeled after WSGI) is basically CGI re-imagined and done better. 1: http://www.modernperlbooks.com/mt/2011/03/why-psgiplack-matt... 2: http://search.cpan.org/~miyagawa/PSGI-1.102/PSGI.pod D'oh! Now I see below that your duplicate of this question got the love it deserved already...

thanks for the links. A question: How long before testing ends? 2014 or 2015?

Re: Perl is 26 Today

#154

Post by Mithaldu » Thu, Dec 19, 2013, 7:53 PM UTC

pasbesoin wrote: post #152

Mithaldu wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly, Programming Perl is a bad book for a newbie to read nowadays. http://perl-tutorial.org explains why and suggests newer alternatives. :)

Well, perhaps one can treat my comment as good part fondness/nostalgia. Although, I clicked through the pop-up link, to find a fairly brief and limited set of points in a short, single critique of the 4th edition. I don't know... It's been a while, but I still remember "Programming Perl" as providing not just the what but a good dose of "why" and context. A lot of people who "don't like Perl" don't seem to understand…

> I think it may remain a decent example of how to write one.

No contest. I'm just worried that, with many people mentioning the "good old books" (which by now are simply bad), without mentioning the current good ones, more newbies will try to get those old books and learn from them and get themselves and others in a lot of trouble that way.

That's why i comment to explain and point out alternatives.

Re: Perl is 26 Today

#155

Post by bonemachine » Thu, Dec 19, 2013, 7:54 PM UTC

cliveholloway wrote: post #90

Favorite Perl snippet (from Joseph Hall's EPP book) [$x => $y]->[$x Holy shit - just realized I first touched Perl 15 years ago!

Egads. If you have time to even think about writing anything other than

    $x > $y ? $x : $y

in this use case, then you have way too much time on your hands.

Re: Perl is 26 Today

#156

Post by nailer » Thu, Dec 19, 2013, 7:56 PM UTC

Mithaldu wrote: post #139

nailer wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By no means would I try and build a high bandwidth graphics pipeline that runs between processes. That's a very specific problem requiring a very specific solution. However it wouldn't be correct to abandon multiple process single thread for the (much more common, particularly on HN) situation of a web app that's running on a server with multiple logical cores in non-evented programming language. > I expressed quite…

> it wouldn't be correct to abandon multiple process single thread I never said that should be done and in fact mentioned that as a solution/problem pair, see the bit about webservers in the PS of my previous comment. :) (A web app is just a specialized webserver.) > When? Please quote. I did so in a much more concise form here: > different use profiles that make certain multi-processing paradigms better suited than…

I guess the issue is the full version of the quote:

"If you can't imagine different use profiles that make certain multi-processing paradigms better suited than others, then you shouldn't be having this discussion"

That was the first time you've proposed the topic! I didn't imagine it because you hadn't actually brought up the subject. I asked you specifically what you needed. And already you've told me not to speak to you about it.

How about: "well in games which need single copies of large in-memory assets a multi-process setup wouldn't work due to copy latency"?

Seriously. You're not very good at discussing things with people.

Perhaps you were a Perl person - who, in general, doesn't create high performance games - avoiding Python for typical Perl task because of lack of multiprocessing?

I'm just showing that you (and others) can solve the multicore issue quite easily with a couple of well known modules.

And you tell me not to talk to you because I didn't anticipate you wanted to talk about /video gaming/?

There's a stereotype of early 2000's Perl people: misanthopes who discuss LARTing, hitting users with 'cluesticks' etc. You're reenforcing it.

Re: Perl is 26 Today

#157

Post by rikacomet » Thu, Dec 19, 2013, 7:59 PM UTC

Mithaldu wrote: post #81

hedwall wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The link seems to be a dead end.

Wow, i failed to link correctly to my own website. Sorry. :(

Thanks. And haha... it happens.

Just very tiny tiny thing: those tables ought to be sortable, that would have been great. I will be looking around, thanks.

Re: Perl is 26 Today

#158

Post by Mithaldu » Thu, Dec 19, 2013, 8:05 PM UTC

nailer wrote: post #156

Mithaldu wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it wouldn't be correct to abandon multiple process single thread I never said that should be done and in fact mentioned that as a solution/problem pair, see the bit about webservers in the PS of my previous comment. :) (A web app is just a specialized webserver.) > When? Please quote. I did so in a much more concise form here: > different use profiles that make certain multi-processing paradigms better suited than…

I guess the issue is the full version of the quote: "If you can't imagine different use profiles that make certain multi-processing paradigms better suited than others, then you shouldn't be having this discussion" That was the first time you've proposed the topic! I didn't imagine it because you hadn't actually brought up the subject. I asked you specifically what you needed. And already you've told me not to speak…

I was hoping to get you to be creative and come up with your own problem/solution pairs. :)

Anyhow, rather than having you both take my word for it, and at the same time try to prove how bad i am at argumenting (i really am terrible!), i'd prefer to see you actually try a minecraft clone in multiple processes, just in case i'm wrong.

Re: Perl is 26 Today

#159

Post by Mithaldu » Thu, Dec 19, 2013, 8:06 PM UTC

rikacomet wrote: post #157

Mithaldu wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, i failed to link correctly to my own website. Sorry. :(

Thanks. And haha... it happens. Just very tiny tiny thing: those tables ought to be sortable, that would have been great. I will be looking around, thanks.

Thanks for the suggestion, i'll try and see if i can make that happen!

Re: Perl is 26 Today

#160

Post by pasbesoin » Thu, Dec 19, 2013, 8:10 PM UTC

Mithaldu wrote: post #154

pasbesoin wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, perhaps one can treat my comment as good part fondness/nostalgia. Although, I clicked through the pop-up link, to find a fairly brief and limited set of points in a short, single critique of the 4th edition. I don't know... It's been a while, but I still remember "Programming Perl" as providing not just the what but a good dose of "why" and context. A lot of people who "don't like Perl" don't seem to understand…

> I think it may remain a decent example of how to write one. No contest. I'm just worried that, with many people mentioning the "good old books" (which by now are simply bad), without mentioning the current good ones, more newbies will try to get those old books and learn from them and get themselves and others in a lot of trouble that way. That's why i comment to explain and point out alternatives.

Well, that's a fair point.

I think I ended up with a (legitimate) ebook of the 4th edition, but I haven't tried it.

Newcomers should understand that Perl is beget of its *NIX heritage. With some understanding of this, it stops being "line noise".

Perl was the language I encountered that "thought the way I do". For those considering, I think this remains a very relevant factor in its continued existence. For what that's worth.