Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
BrowserUk,
When I saw that you had written a meditation about FUD I anticipated a long thoughtful examination of the problem. You have repeatedly demonstrated a propensity for loquacious writeups, heated debates and a willingness to spend an exorbitant amount of your time helping other people with little to no personal pay off. I haven't always agreed with you and at times rathered you practiced the 17th verse but I rarely read something you write and aren't edified in some way. This is an exception and I was disappointed. The summary of the meditations is that, allowing FUD to spread creates monsters and we collectively are responsible. Now, I fully understand that it isn't your job to impress me but I truly was hoping for some examples of how it hurts the community, the image of perl to outsiders the fledgling programmer, etc. I personally have learned one of the dangers of spreading FUD - even when it was unintentional (I pissed someone off that I respected and relied on for help). Before I became immersed in the perl community, I had no idea how many freaking insanely smart people were out there. In general, I find it full of autodidacts willing to spend vast amounts of time learning. We also tend to be more helpful than obstructing and more friendly than antagonistic. I am not trying to paint with blinders on that the community is some kind of utopia - just that I really like it. There are numerous long discussions that go over my head and I am amazed at the breadth and depth of the knowledge. Many even fly in the face of Godwin's law. I know pitifully little about threads to know FUD from non-FUD. I can't defer to one or the other based on experience and knowledge because you are both titans from my perspective. I know you would rather have a concrete code example at the center of debate but might I propose another alternative? I just checked and there are two tutorials regarding threading. I have no idea if they are any good and it doesn't really matter - I am suggesting you write a third. A really long one - basically the ADD cliff notes of what should be a book I would never buy nor read. Cover what threads are, both from an OS and a language perspective. Provide pointers to good well written references to historical information, etc. Introduce perl threads and there long purportedly sordid history. Enumerate each distinct assertion you consider FUD and then explain why it isn't really true (or when it stopped being true). Go into the true disadvantages (assuming there are any) and what things you should consider before using threads. Then, go into a very basic example of using threads commenting on why you did this but avoided that. Continue on to more complex examples. Use, or reference, real examples from the site where using a threaded solution was the right way to go. Here is the promise I make to you if you take up my challenge: I will work through the tutorial finally learning an aspect of the language that I have blissfully remained ignorant of for 8 years (admittedly mostly due to negative impressions from others). I will either become a convert and rally behind you whenever I see FUD - pointing to the tutorial as proof or I will find you full of BS and at least I personally will have the answer to who is right. Of course, a third possibility exists - I will find problems that you haven't encountered and working through them will elucidate the matter for both of us. Cheers - L~R In reply to Re: Why it is important to counter FUD.
by Limbic~Region
|
|