comment on

Do you guys think I should just remove entirely the dubious/unknown tutorials and just replace them with some of the suggestions from roboticus? One thing I worry about is PerlMonks... looks a little 1999. I love for people to come here but hopefully they don't think it's a reflection of Perl (these may be web designers, possibly used to shinier sites from Ruby, Python or PHP). Also, PM is quite slow loading for me, so possibly also for other people. Sometimes it's a minute or more to get a page up.

And, can anyone give me any reasons to remove the "SitePoint Articles" stuff? Other than Attack of the Killer Bugs, which seems to still be relevant, the others either review old books or have old Perl How-to's that I can't tell if they (at this age) are giving bad advice now.

In reply to Re: Help with updating a Perl Resources sticky thread at a web developer forum? by StommePoes
in thread Help with updating a Perl Resources sticky thread at a web developer forum? by StommePoes

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


Your skill will accomplish what the force of many cannot
	PerlMonks