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

Re: Re: Ignorant Article

by Anonymous Monk
on Feb 18, 2003 at 16:40 UTC ( #236302=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Ignorant Article
in thread Ignorant Article

Yes Dave, at least you have a bit more knowledge than your peers in this thread. Selena Sol is in fact a public pseudonym for me, Eric.

In terms of what I know about CGI programming, I think that I know just enough to have inspired a thousand web developers, written books, spoken at conferences and won awards, and solved lots of problems people were having both technically and not.

Does that mean I am a guru?

No, it does not. And Inever ever claimed to be. It is no secret that I am not a programmer and I have no intention of being one. And even if I did, I still know that there would be a hundred punks like you claiming to be better.

Whatever.

As far as my archive goes, it is a valuable resource which you obviously have not bothered to truly investigate. As an open source project,some of the best perl developers from around the world have contributed to it and the current architecture is far superior to any applicaiton development framework for Perl CGI that exists today.

- Selena Sol

www.extropia.com (choose the open source link) and for goodness sakes, at least read the whole article before you all spout off ignorantly.


Comment on Re: Re: Ignorant Article
Re: Re: Re: Ignorant Article
by l2kashe (Deacon) on Feb 18, 2003 at 17:06 UTC
    Only slight offense intended here.

    I've read the page in question, as well as this thread. There is this thing called personal opinion, and free speech. There is also this other thing called respect.

    Irregarless of how great you or other think your code/repository is, no one has the right to stomp in and start b**chslapping monks around and flaming. I have massive respect for merlyn or tye, who have been around the block a bit more than most I would guess. Why do you ask, because even if they know the intracacies of whatever piece of a problem space I may be having an issue with, I have yet to see them once state to someone else that they are stupid, dumb, ignorant, etc..

    The reason this particular community is so great is directly related to that. Not that an advanced monk knows more, and keeps the little guys down, but rather that they are always willing to help and pull up the next saint-to-be. This whole community works because people "RESPECT" each other as developers and as human beings, instead of defining the relationship as someone at the far end of a text box.

    So you can keep your code, your respository, and your opinions to yourself if the only way you can manage to talk is flaming. If you can manage to communicate like an adult about the timeframe your article was posted, what the 'net was like at that point, the fact that the page was part of a larger article, and what you were trying to get across, you might actually get decent feedback.

    Thank you very much and find another URL

    /* And the Creator, against his better judgement, wrote man.c */
      It is 1:16 in Malaysia where I am, so I will definitely stop after this. :)

      12kashe, you're right that I should not have let the posters before me, who were attacking me personally, get me riled. Just water under th bridge right?

      You are right in this.

      Unfortunately, I am just so sick and tired of this kind've post and needed a bit of vent.

      Sadly, it is the lack of respect that you state as being foundational to the community which I believe was there in the beginning but which is no longer there, that has finally driven me out of the perl community altogether.

      The irony is that I was just speaking to an old time friend who was trying to convince me in his own way, to come back and I was actually thinking about it.

      Then I get unsolicited mail from one of the monks telling me to read this thread. So I did, and it really hurt my feelings.

      So, fine. I reacted poorly, you are right. Nevertheless, I have other things to do.

      Next time, when someone starts a thread about someone else's work as "Ignorant" maybe you will step in a bit sooner beacuse, regardless of the fact that I should not have 'continued' it, it was lack of respect that started this.

        Thanks for coming back and stating this.

        Your right that it can be painful when your personal work is targeted. Your also right it can be difficult to bite your tongue, especially when you feel strongly that the initiator doesn't know what they are talking about.

        But we honestly do have a fairly solid, understanding community here. Its the reason I actually created an account here, and continue coming back day after day. Perlmonks really is a breath of fresh air compared to many of the communities out there.

        So I'm glad you cleared the air, and I'm sorry I was so blunt. I just simply couldn't allow the thread to continue in that manner.

        On a side note, I think the article was fairly accurate. While there have been improvements (mod_perl, fastcgi, et all) the state problems, and the server load haunted admins for a long time. Also alot of CGI in the wild was one persons code, copied and pasted in alot of places, and not really optomized for the environment it was in, nor the language it was written in.

        Sorry to leave a bad taste in your mouth, but maybe you should troll around a bit and see what we have to offer. One case in point is a new monk xmath. He dived right in the first day here creating a new module along the lines of Dumper, with nothing out there scratching his itch. Since then he was asked why reinvent that wheel, why not patch existing modules, etc.. Now I believe a portion of the monks here are actively helping to debug and extend the module. Such is life in the monastary, as it should be.

        sub nit { print "Its L2Kashe\nThink processors :)\n"; }

        happy hacking


        /* And the Creator, against his better judgement, wrote man.c */
Re: Re: Re: Ignorant Article
by Anonymous Monk on Feb 18, 2003 at 17:13 UTC
    One last thing before I leave this hole in he web.

    My code...My personal code...helped the scientists at NIH map the human genome. It provided the basis for the online community around the Electronic Frontier Foundation. It handles billions of pounds annually at banks in Europe and Asia. It runs 4 intelligent buildings in 3 countries. It allowed me to build and sell two companies. Has been published 7 times over. It was requested for presentation at the 1st two OReilly Perl Cons. It underlies New York City's Post-September 11th command and Control website that was erected within 2 days for free and is still 100% active today.

    In addition, under other people's customization it runs at NASA, GE, SGI, GM - still AFTER 6 YEARS, several hospitals, at least 1 emergency rescue unit, more personal websites than I can count. It has been translated into 4 languages. And it has been the basis to launch many successful e-commerce websites and careers in web design and development.

    Does this make me a guru programmer?

    No.

    And frankly I couldn't give a flying hoot about being a guru programmer. With only a few exceptions, every guru programmer I know, especially those in the perl community, has ZERO clue about the purpose of technology.

    It does mean however, that I helped a lot of people solve a lot of problems. And to tell you the truth, you pin heads can yap all you want to about the fastest, cleanest code, but I have been successful and have helped make the world a better place despite my MANY flaws and despite the MANY flaws in my programming. So I am satisfied.

    And I will tell you another thing, if it was not for me and Matt Wright, Perl/CGI may never have even been born. We were the ones who made it accessible to the masses. We were the ones who made it fun in the 1994 when all of you folks did not even know what CGI was (probably) :)

    - Selena Sol

      you pin heads can yap all you want to about the fastest, cleanest code, but I have been successful and have helped make the world a better place despite my MANY flaws and despite the MANY flaws in my programming

      With all due respect, this sounds like a false dilemma. "Either you write clean, fast code or you write useful code." I'm not sure that's what you intend.

      I can certainly sympathize that having working code condemned as a bad example is painful, but I'm prepared to learn from my mistakes if there's a better way to do something. (At least, I try.) If it takes me doing something stupid in public to help another person avoid the same mistake, I'm willing to live with that. (I'm not going to link to any examples, but they're out there.)

      By teaching good habits, we help people write better, cleaner, more maintainable, and more secure code. Those all seem positive to me. It's pretty easy to be snippy about bad habits (and some of them are pretty contentious), and that's something all to prevalent in the Perl community and in the larger technical community. I wish it weren't the case, but I can only change my own actions.

        > With all due respect, this sounds
        > like a false dilemma. "Either you
        > write clean, fast code or you write
        > useful code." I'm not sure that's what you intend.

        Due respect noted. IMHO, your statement is wrong. You can have any combination of the three factors. You can also have many shades of grey, such as code that is 90% clean and 80% useful which may be chosen over code that is 95% clean and 60% useful.


        > I can certainly sympathize that having
        > working code condemned as a bad example
        > is painful, but I'm prepared to learn
        > from my mistakes if there's a better
        > way to do something.

        I too enjoy learning from mistakes. My point is not that I reject criticism but that I reject a community that is poor in its maturity about giving criticism. After awhile, and I did so for many years, it just gets tiring.

        Case in point...you say..."if there's a better way to do something." In it, there is the underlying suggestion that you feel that I have done it in a less than 'correct' way.

        What can I do about this argument? It is fundamentally against one of the foundations upon which Perl was built which is that there is more than one way to do anything. Yet it is an argument that I constantly see.

        While I am not a complete relativist, I do believe that there is nothing cut and dry in programing and that people who worry about "the better and best ways to do things" are often focussed more on algorithms than on people or business. Not that this applies to you, but just that generally I have foun this to be true, ESPECIALLY in the Perl community which in my qualitative experience tend to be much more snobby than the Java and COM communities.

        I believe that having code that is legible to a manager can be just as "desireable" as having swank algorithms.

        People who think there is a better way to do it usually mean that there is a more effient algorithm to do it. Taking a three line REGEX and compressing it to one for example.

        But to me, their code is to various degrees more cryptic.

        Many times, their code is so much more cryptic that the code is no longer legible to a manager....or to a beginner....or to an intermediate....or sometimes to other gurus.

        In my world, as a pointy haired boss, I sometimes prefer the slower algorithm that are more supportable for certain types of code and efficient, fast code for other types of code.

        This can be for one of many reasons. For example, suppose the price of hardware acceleration is FAR cheaper than software support and training. What should the business do? Especially given that 9 out of 10 software projects fail and that technology undergoes a revolution every 3 or 4 years.

        Code quality will depend on a zillion factors and to me is often 100% in the eyes of the beholder.

        But in the Perl community this is too often not the case. In the Perl community, sometimes in the last 6 years,this all changed. The community as defined by Larry Wall went towards the specialist in a glass tower. Algorithms, in my own personal experience with the community, have suddenly become more important that solving the problems. And those of us who prefer to be mediocre at code and excellent at solutions are derrided as either ignorant, dangerous, or bad programmers.

        I can take criticism like the rest. Please don't turn this into some personal immaturity (although my reaction to being called ignornant was) :)

        My point is that the Perl communnity should take a look at itself and ask why someone who was such a staunch supporter for many years should be fed up.

      Yeah sure, it is a bleeding shame they did not yet put up a statue for you in every ISP's office.

      CountZero

      "If you have four groups working on a compiler, you'll get a 4-pass compiler." - Conway's Law

Re: Re: Re: Ignorant Article
by davorg (Chancellor) on Feb 18, 2003 at 17:20 UTC

    It's been a while since anyone called me a punk. It was probably 1977 and as I was listening to the Sex Pistols at the time the description was probably accurate.

    I'll admit that it's been at least a couple of years since I looked at your scripts. I'll take another look just as soon as Extropia comes back up and I'll report back with my opinions. If you're interested, I'll be measuring them against the criteria that I list in my article Finding CGI Scripts.

    I certainly can't claim to have inspired a thousand web developers, but I know I've saved hundreds of web sites from using Matt Wright's scripts by running the nms project. In my opinion this has also been worked on by "some of the best perl developers from around the world". I wonder if they were the same ones as worked on your project :)

    --
    <http://www.dave.org.uk>

    "The first rule of Perl club is you do not talk about Perl club."
    -- Chip Salzenberg

      Your NMS site is wonderful. Just browsed. Your disrespect for Matt Wright, one of the true pioneers of CGI, to me, is appauling, and is part of what pissed me off about this whole thread. Because the same misdirected disrespect is often thrown at me.

      It is this disrespect that prompted me away from the perl community since 99 and not return. Just feedback to you. Live your life as you see fit.

      - Selena Sol

        Well, any disrespect on that site is for Matt's code not for Matt himself. He and I have exchanged a few friendly emails on the subject and he even has nice things to say about us on his web site.

        That makes two people who have raised these complaints about the nms project - you and godzilla - against dozens of people who have thanked me for the work. I can live with those ratios.

        --
        <http://www.dave.org.uk>

        "The first rule of Perl club is you do not talk about Perl club."
        -- Chip Salzenberg

Re^3: Ignorant Article
by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Feb 18, 2003 at 18:55 UTC

    Maybe Dave isn't merely claiming to be better, after all. He and friends at London.pm have spent a fair amount of time creating properly written drop-in replacements for Matt's scripts.

    Your article is also mixing up many levels of things. That CGI scripts produce ugly pages is a ridiculous claim; they can send to the browser any output they wish to, just like all other dynamic webpage generation technology can. It is true that state is hard to maintain in CGI, but so is it with any other dynamic webpage generation technology because HTTP itself, the protocol on which all them have to build, is inherently stateless. (Whoever claimed cookies were the solution forgets they're conceptually the same thing as hidden fields, which by the way is exactly the same thing as encoding data in the URL at least for GET forms so your article's separate mention is redundant.)

    Makeshifts last the longest.

      While I'd agree that conceptually cookies and hidden fields are similar -- they both offer ways to maintain state within the confines of a stateless protocol -- I would argue that they are, in fact, different enough for separate discussion. There are RFC's for cookies that make their use much more predictable than hidden fields. And they have features like expirations that you'd have to build into a hidden fields implementation.

      I'm not arguing that any one state mechanism is better or worse. But they are different. I've used them both for different situations. The advantage of good abstractions and wrappers is that they provide a consistent state-saving API regardless of the underlying method(s) used. This may be what Selena/Eric was referring to with J2EE. To my knowledge it only hides it all under a consistent API, but still uses cookies (usually) or hidden fields as the mechanism. I always throw those "encoded in the URL" state-saving methods into the same bucket as hidden fields, but one could argue that as another, distinct method with its own distinct merits. IMO, A really good API defaults to whatever is available so that there's no real dependency. i.e., if cookies are disabled use another method. Selena/Eric's knock on CGI may be that there is no such layering there. I'd argue that for that you pick a higher level abstraction.

Re: Re: Re: Ignorant Article
by Anonymous Monk on Feb 21, 2003 at 09:48 UTC

    Yet another flamefest at Perlmonks? Count me in.

    I know just enough to have inspired a thousand web developers,

    Yeah, inspired them to write secure, maintainable, bug-free code. Inspired them to only release code they feel will contribute something. Inspired them to contribute to central code repositories (like cpan) to minimize needless duplication of effort and encourage peer review. In other words, inspired them to write code completely different than yours.

    written books

    Have you looked at the quality of most Perl books lately? They suck. I haven't read any of yours, nor do I intend to. There is a small minority of excellent Perl books such as Data Munging with Perl written by the guy you're flaming who is exponentially more respected than you in the Perl community.

    spoken at conferences and won awards, and solved lots of problems people were having both technically and not.

    Spoken on what? How not to program, using your own code as examples? What awards? Matt Wright's insecure programming & open spam relay awards? As for solving problems, I'm pretty sure you're creating just as many for anyone who will maintain that spaghetti code of yours.

    Does that mean I am a guru?

    Yuck, you just wrecked a perfectly good word. Now I'm going to have refer to the likes of Elian, davorg, TheDamian, merlyn, tye, Abigail-II and others as something totally different.

    It is no secret that I am not a programmer and I have no intention of being one.

    If you write code, you are a programmer. Check the dictionary definition if you'd like. You can't just totally suck and say "well I'm not a programmer." Keep your garbage code to yourself, you're corrupting minds that could be molded into doing something productive.

    I still know that there would be a hundred punks like you claiming to be better.

    Punks? Now that's not very nice. And yes, if you did consider yourself a "programming guru" there would be a hundred (actually, more like hundreds of thousands) of people who would consider themselves more skilled than you, and rightfully so. Kind of like the current situation now isn't it?

    As far as my archive goes, it is a valuable resource which you obviously have not bothered to truly investigate

    Actually, I did a survey, 80% of people say it was useless crap, the other 20% asked me what the pretty dollar signs mean. There is tonnes of excellent code out there, no need to very poorly duplicate it's functionality.

    As an open source project,some of the best perl developers from around the world have contributed to it

    Once again, Matt Wright isn't one of the best perl developers in the world, and he definately wasn't one of them 5 years ago (sorry Matt, you just make a good example ;-). And while those 500 monkeys randomly typing on 500 typewriters did turn out substantially better code than you, it still wasn't that good.

    and the current architecture is far superior to any applicaiton development framework for Perl CGI that exists today.

    Damn, I just threw up. My stomach couldn't handle that last sentence. Guess you won ;-P

    Heh, </flame> that was fun, we should do it again sometime. This entire post is meant as a half-joke so don't take it too seriously, just remember to look at your work objectively and ask yourself if it really does contribute something before publicizing it. If you feel it does, more power to you, but don't do it just for your egos sake :).

    Have a nice day :)

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://236302]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others avoiding work at the Monastery: (9)
As of 2014-04-16 11:37 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    April first is:







    Results (424 votes), past polls