Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
No such thing as a small change
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Tact and the Monastery

by Ovid (Cardinal)
on Sep 14, 2002 at 16:55 UTC ( #197896=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Tact and the Monastery

Interesting ... we just hired a new programmer and I recommended that he get an account here. His code seems good and solid and I definitely signed off on his code review. However, he has had no exposure to the Perl community. Personally, I was rather surprised by that as I've noticed that there tends to be a correlation between code quality and exposure to the community (and I don't just mean Perlmonks).

I have had the same experience as you regarding self-improvement since I've come to this site. I've heard some complain about the signal to noise ratio or they think that the Monks are too dogmatic, but while I would choose different labels, I wouldn't disagree with those statements: these qualities often foster spirited debate and when I get to read long threads of pros and cons of a particular thing, I actually have a chance to see a variety of viewpoints. When's the last time you saw that in some dusty ol' computer book? :)

Cheers,
Ovid

Join the Perlmonks Setiathome Group or just click on the the link and check out our stats.


Comment on Re: Tact and the Monastery
Re^2: Tact and the Monastery
by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Sep 14, 2002 at 17:04 UTC
    They complain about signal to noise ratio..? These must be some rather picky folks. I honestly haven't seen anything that beats the monastery in that regard.

    Makeshifts last the longest.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://197896]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others taking refuge in the Monastery: (18)
As of 2014-07-23 12:51 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (142 votes), past polls