Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Do you know where your variables are?
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: scope in extreme programming ("perl")

by tye (Cardinal)
on Jun 22, 2007 at 03:52 UTC ( #622702=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: scope in extreme programming
in thread scope in extreme programming

I didn't realize that extreme programming and Perl were mutually exclusive.

I'd like to read about extreme programming. I think it is an interesting and useful subject to be discussed at a site meant to be useful to Perl programmers.

If you'd like to only get Perl syntax questions and flames telling people that their question would be more appropriate in comp.programming.extreme, then perhaps you'd be happier using Usenet instead of PerlMonks. To my delight, PerlMonks is not Usenet.

- tye        


Comment on Re^2: scope in extreme programming ("perl")
Re^3: scope in extreme programming ("perl")
by naikonta (Curate) on Jun 22, 2007 at 04:50 UTC
    I didn't realize that extreme programming and Perl were mutually exclusive.

    Update:
    OK, I'm sorry I misinterpreted your words. I came across this website a while ago. It's been up for a few years so I think most people already knew about it. I bring it up here because I see some relevant context to the collaboration between That's not true, well, at least for some Extreme Perlers. They put great efforts to get the best out of both extremists :-) Perl and eXtreme Programming. They call the efforts collaboration as "marriage". An excerpt from the website:

    This book is about a marriage of two compatible yet unlikely partners. Extreme Programming (XP) is a software development methodology that enables users, business people, programmers, and computers to communicate effectively. Perl is a dynamic programming language that lets an XP team embrace the inevitable change caused by effective communication. Perl is the fixer and doer of the pair, and XP is the organizer and facilitator. Together they help you build robust software applications efficiently.

    Open source softwares? Share and enjoy. Make profit from them if you can. Yet, share and enjoy!

Re^3: scope in extreme programming (no flame)
by shmem (Canon) on Jun 22, 2007 at 07:47 UTC
    I didn't realize that extreme programming and Perl were mutually exclusive.

    Did I say so? I was merely hinting at PerlMonks not being wikipedia or an eplain-me-the-world site - and saying that I find asking arbitrary questions (of the kind the OP and my reply are) not appropriate for PerlMonks - even if they carry the terms "scope" and "programming", or even "extreme programming". I did that in a somewhat terse way, but no flame was intended.

    Of course extreme programming "is an interesting and useful subject to be discussed at a site meant to be useful to Perl programmers" - but the OP didn't do that, there's no discussion whatsoever, they've merely asked to explain them a term in the context of - extreme programming, not perl!

    Now that particular question would really have better been asked in comp.programming.extreme.

    --shmem

    _($_=" "x(1<<5)."?\n".q·/)Oo.  G°\        /
                                  /\_¯/(q    /
    ----------------------------  \__(m.====·.(_("always off the crowd"))."·
    ");sub _{s./.($e="'Itrs `mnsgdq Gdbj O`qkdq")=~y/"-y/#-z/;$e.e && print}
      <aside>

      Call me a 'fence-sitter', but ..

      I do see tye's point. Your finish your post And your perl question is? which does imply 'that is not is a perl question' and that 'one should restrict oneself to perl questions', which detracted from the fact that it was just a badly (dare I say it? trollish) worded question.

      However, without needing to read your explanation, I did realise your intent and don't feel that you needed to be 'stomped' on so vehemently.

      I don't think there is a fight to win here. You are both wrong! (joke!) Lets hope the OP comes back with further context for their question, and we can collectively add to our knowledge pool.

      </aside>

      Three definitions of scope in contexts that might relate to Extreme Programming:

      I would say from searching on the phrase 'extreme programming scope' (e.g. Google Books - Extreme Programming) that 'scope' in the context of 'extreme programming' means pretty much the same as it does for any programming language or IT project.

      -=( Graq )=-

      To be clear, I didn't say you flamed, because I didn't think you flamed. Of course the root node didn't contain any discussion. It asked a question and discussion results from that. The root node did a poor job of asking what I find an interesting question that is relevant to Perl programmers. Your node did a poor job of asking a question that wasn't the least bit interesting and isn't relevant to Perl programming. So while the root node is of pretty darn poor quality, you managed to produce an even worse node, IMO.

      I really wish that more monks would reply to the nodes where they have something worth saying. For example, if one doesn't understand the question, then at least wait a while before proclaiming your inability to understand to the world. In most cases, someone will come along who does understand the question and perhaps can produce some interesting discussion.

      So, every once in a while I register my protest against replies that have nothing at all Perl related to offer because they aren't doing anything but criticizing a node. And it was easy to do in this case because I found your trivial, no-effort critique to have even missed the mark.

      And even if no interesting discussion results, I'd rather see only replies that at least go beyond criticizing the quality of the question. I don't mind people giving pointers at how to better formulate the question, so long as the reply also contains something besides that. If you want to poke the author because you think that they were off-topic (which, to be clear, is an assessment I disagree with in this specific case), then at least indulge in doing so only if you can add something interesting to the conversation that is somewhat on-topic or at least wait for others to have some more inspired comment that also makes that point for you.

      Had the original poster just left in one more word, the question would have been much better. I'd enjoy seeing some discussion about "scope reduction", which seems quite clear to me is the main point of this question. I realize that many people won't see that easily, though. And, no, even that question doesn't contain the word "Perl". But your question contained the word "Perl" and was much more off-topic (and pointless). This site often does a great job of taking a poor question and turning it into a quality discussion, and almost always one that heavily touches on Perl programming.

      And I doubt a discussion of "scope reduction and extreme programming" would get very Perl-specific, but it'd still likely be interesting and useful to Perl programmers and so would be on-topic for PerlMonks and worth having here. General programming questions are some of the most interesting questions we get.

      I realize that it takes a small amount of sophistication to go beyond a knee-jerk "and your Perl question is?" mindset when figuring out what is on-topic at PerlMonks. Interesting topics that are very appropriate at PerlMonks can sometimes never mention the word "Perl".

      - tye        

Re^3: scope in extreme programming ("perl")
by blazar (Canon) on Jun 22, 2007 at 10:06 UTC
    I didn't realize that extreme programming and Perl were mutually exclusive.

    tye, I didn't realize that porn and Perl were mutually exclusive. Should I be earnest to the maximum point? Well, it played a role in getting me involved with Perl. So a priori it's not even OT. However, should I ask: 'what does the term "dp" mean in the context of "porn"?' wouldn't you reply to the effect of "and your perl question is?" It may become an interesting Perl question if it were about how to use perl to retrieve interesting dp material out of the web - although I would expect flames getting out of it instead...

    I'd like to read about extreme programming. I think it is an interesting and useful subject to be discussed at a site meant to be useful to Perl programmers.

    Granted. If there's some actual Perl content. Even if a concept is explained abstractly... provided that there's at least a hint of a Perl example. But the OP both in title and content is nothing like this.

    If you'd like to only get Perl syntax questions and flames telling people that their question would be more appropriate in comp.programming.extreme, then perhaps you'd be happier using Usenet instead of PerlMonks. To my delight, PerlMonks is not Usenet.

    Oh, c'mon! You're a fantastic hacker whom I greatly respect, so I'm not dismissing you with a cheap argument. Having a background in Usenet, which I like, I'm probably biased towards it: yet I understand your concerns and especially the ones towards very strict policies about sticking to the topic. But think of it: there's a threshold, and the root node of this thread is well below any reasonable threshold for quite about anybody's standard.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://622702]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others browsing the Monastery: (10)
As of 2014-09-23 18:54 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    How do you remember the number of days in each month?











    Results (239 votes), past polls