Re^4: [OT]: threading recursive subroutines.

[BrowserUk]

You're quite wrong. It is not you I have a problem with. How could it be, as I do not know you?

I do have a problem with many of your responses here. For the reasons I have often attempted to explain in detail.

Those explanations can be summarised as:

You have a tendency to offer 'potted wisdoms' rather than actual solutions.

This might be useful if those wisdoms were always, or even usually correct, but they aren't. Moreover, if they were sufficiently incorrect as to being obviously so, then I would ignore them and allow nature to take its course. But the danger is that they are often sufficiently grounded and plausible, as to make them casually indiscernible from ideas worth pursuing. Which makes them very capable of causing people to waste a lot of time doing so.

What's worse, even when your "ol'timer logic" has been comprehensively demonstrated to be flawed, again & again, you keep on trotting out your "virtual memory is disk" dogma. And you're still doing it.

Conversely, I've never seen you offer any Perl code as a solution. Nary a once. Maybe I just missed it?

To reiterate, it isn't you, but your posts I have a problem with.

[Limbic~Region]

BrowserUk,
Conversely, I've never seen you offer any Perl code as a solution. Nary a once. Maybe I just missed it?

I couldn't possibly imagine this to be true so I set out to prove you wrong. While you are in fact wrong, I was quite suprised by the results.

sundialsvc4 has been a monk since 2007-10-29 (3.25 years) and has posted 1148 nodes in that time. Of those, 1073 (93.5%) are replies. Of those, 141 (13.1%) have code tags. In other words, about 1 in 8 response have code. Here is the interesting thing - what I found surprising. Of the 141 with code tags, 89 (63.1%) were made in a one month window (2009-02-26 to 2009-03-25). In fact, of the 444 replies made in 2010, only 18 (4%) had code tags. Rather than being 1 in 8 responses it dropped to 1 in 25. Of the 94 replies so far in 2011 - none have code tags.

I want to be clear, I didn't gather this information to attack sundialsvc4. I honestly thought you were letting your feelings blind you to honest contributions. Disclaimers: The presence of a code tag doesn't mean the presence of actual code. While I excluded root nodes (non-replies), there isn't an easy way to exclude replies to yourself. I certainly didn't review all 1073 responses to subjectively quantify value and one should not draw the conclusion that because no code was provided that the response wasn't useful.

[BrowserUk]

Of the 141 with code tags, 89 (63.1%) were made in a one month window (2009-02-26 to 2009-03-25).

I'm not sure how to respond to this, nor even quite what to make of your intent.

What I can say is that I've just waded through all 620 nodes posted in 2009, and of the 141 with code tags, exactly 12 contain actual code. All those are in his own root nodes (ie. his own code asking questions, or in those threads). All bar one are just snippets. Just one, was actual, runnable code.

All the other 129 instances of code tags are used as poor substitutes for [mod://] tags; or [keyword] tags or [perldoc://] tags;

Or as an inappropriate quoting mechanism: :-), COBOL, TIMTOWTDI, THItheBoxNK, ooommmmmmm!, Have you heard of m-o-n-s-t-e-r-.-c-o-m and similar.

I also scanned on into the first half of 2010 and it is a similar story. Not a single instance of him proffering a working solution to an OP.

Maybe my memory is not so bad after all.