Around the same time you made this reply,
you claimed:
I choose to spend my time striving to assist that person
It was this implausible claim that provoked me to call you out
for posting a meandering five-paragraph "opinion" piece that
could not possibly help the OP solve his problem.
Note that BrowserUk
went the extra mile to actually help the OP by
predicting the root cause of his error -- even though the OP did not post sufficient code!
And davido
clearly and succinctly described
what caused the OP's problem and showed how it should be written.
Both these nodes (deservedly) have 40+ reputation, while yours
is at the other end of the scale.
Instead of exhorting other monks to "constructively answer other people’s questions",
I suggest you reflect on why the
BrowserUk and davido replies
earned a node reputation more than 50 points higher than
yours in this specific case and learn from it.
| [reply] |
The fact that you are capable of producing semi-helpful posts, like the sudden flurry today, makes the fact that your posts are also often factually wrong or nonsensical worse. If you actually cared about helping people, you would fact-check your posts and only post when you know what you are talking about. The fact that you've been told this probably a hundred times so far and still choose to ignore it is yet further proof that you don't care, or even worse, might be doing it intentionally. Every regular reader knows this by now. What is the point anymore?
| [reply] |
sundialsvc4:
Gentlemen, your time would be better served trying to constructively answer other people’s questions, and less time bashing other Monks. If you don’t care for what someone else is saying, there’s a simple solution: ignore that person. Completely. Politely.
I work on a very routine basis with lots of other languages besides Perl. Maybe you don’t. But, if you do, then this irregularity of Perl’s syntax, vis á vis other languages that you are (today, more ...) likely to encounter, is very confusing. You expect a subroutine declaration to require a parameter-list enclosed in parentheses, even if that list is empty. You expect that the position of the declaration within the source-code also does not matter, except to the extent that it binds it to a particular class or object. You expect the behavior of the language to be consistently one way or another. But, none of these things are true of the Perl-5 language.
“And that’s simply the way that it is.”
Just more flush worthy claptrap
Perl is pretty much the only language you write sub foo... and to get that far you'd have to read perlintro/perlsub ... its irrelevant what one is accustomed to, you can't make stuff up, and you can't get started without reading the docs
| [reply] |
