s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts

:) Should we s/PERL/Perl/g over new posts? It hurts my eyes.

Update: Look, all I'm saying is that I just wish people would learn to spell Perl PROPerlY! Oh shii...

-Andrew.

Andrew Tomazos | andrew@tomazos.com | www.tomazos.com

Comment on s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by davorg (Chancellor) on Aug 01, 2005 at 10:09 UTC
No, please don't. It's a useful measure of the poster's level of clue. I'm far more likely to help someone who has taken to trouble to learn the name of the language they are trying to use. -- <http://www.dave.org.uk> "The first rule of Perl club is you do not talk about Perl club." -- Chip Salzenberg	[reply]
Re^2: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by bluto (Curate) on Aug 01, 2005 at 15:47 UTC
By definition, if I ask for help with a problem, then I'm am clueless (at least wrt the problem). What I care about more than that is: Will they learn from my answer? I don't think their usage of "PERL" determines this. Some folks are just so brand spanking new and eager to learn that we don't need to kill their enthusiasm with a witty diatribe of PERL vs Perl vs perl. If they have any learning potential they'll figure this useless bit of trivia out eventually, and if not they'll leave PM eventually and end up doing something easier like flipping burgers.	[reply]
Re^3: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by davorg (Chancellor) on Aug 01, 2005 at 15:50 UTC
Oops... looks like I missed the <joke> ... </joke> tags around that post. I'll try to remember them in future. -- <http://www.dave.org.uk> "The first rule of Perl club is you do not talk about Perl club." -- Chip Salzenberg	[reply]
Re^4: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by bluto (Curate) on Aug 01, 2005 at 16:20 UTC
Re^2: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by GrandFather (Saint) on Aug 01, 2005 at 21:21 UTC
You mean I shouldn't have /msgd the author of a recent node asking for s/PREL/Perl/? Perl is Huffman encoded by design.	[reply]
Re^3: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by Popcorn Dave (Abbot) on Aug 02, 2005 at 06:04 UTC
Of course you should have. Maybe the OP wanted shampoo (Prell) not code help ;) Useless trivia: In the 2004 Las Vegas phone book there are approximately 28 pages of ads for massage, but almost 200 for lawyers.	[reply]
Re^4: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by GrandFather (Saint) on Aug 02, 2005 at 09:59 UTC
Re: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by davido (Cardinal) on Aug 01, 2005 at 16:09 UTC
No, we shouldn't, for several reasons: Janitors don't change node content, and generally only retitle to improve searchability. See Janitors' Guidelines for further insight. Perl = the language. perl = the executable interpreter/compiler. PERL = a common error made by novices, often helpful in determining what level of hand-holding will be necessary when responding to posts that contain this reference. At least in the case of Perl and perl, we cannot automatically know which is applicable without discerning whether we're talking about the language or the binary. That's not a simple s///g. Oh, and if I didn't stress it strongly enough, Janitors don't fix spelling, capitalization, grammar, punctuation, etc. We don't rephrase, reword, simply state, or anything else along those lines. It's up to the author to master the language or at least communicate effectively. The Janitors job is just to clean up the behind-the-scenes stuff like monastery-style HTML tags. We clean up, we don't edit. You yourself are an Abbot, and as such have undoubtedly been introduced to a description of Friar powers and How do I use the power of consideration responsibly? in the past. We can all use a refresher on this article from time to time. Let's do our best to keep considerations reasonable and responsible. Dave	[reply]
Re: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by Taulmarill (Deacon) on Aug 01, 2005 at 12:19 UTC
think of it, if it would be done, no one would understand what you are talking about, because your text had been altered by some stupid regex that didn't know you wanted to discuss exact that. i don't want some code to change my writing more than needed. i don't want offensive words removed or altered. i just want to read what another person actualy typed. your intention may be good. but think it further and consider where it would lead.	[reply]
Re: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by blazar (Canon) on Aug 01, 2005 at 10:01 UTC
Hehe, I wonder if an automatic reminder could be made so as to /msg them something that points to the relevant documentation, e.g. What's the difference between "perl" and "Perl"?	[reply]
Re: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by cog (Parson) on Aug 01, 2005 at 16:37 UTC
It hurts my eyes. Wash'em with warm water :-) -- YAPC::EU::2005 is in Braga, Portugal.	[reply]
Re: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by Mutant (Priest) on Aug 01, 2005 at 10:58 UTC
Hmm... but then I wouldn't be able to earn extra points for my crackpot score.	[reply]
Re: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by jpeg (Chaplain) on Aug 01, 2005 at 19:53 UTC
Once you make that change, why not automatically insert "use warnings;" and "use strict;"? And we could set up an autoreply that says "use CGI.pm" if any keywords like "apache" or "POST" are found in the new node. I'm more interested in the communication skills I have to develop when discussing a common interest with one who has a different education and background. For that, I'll forgo forcing someone to follow trivial rules before I hear what they have to say. -- jpg	[reply]
Re: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by itub (Priest) on Aug 01, 2005 at 18:59 UTC
But then people wouldn't be able to downvote the note to punish the node's author for this most severe infraction! :-)	[reply]
Re: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by biosysadmin (Deacon) on Aug 02, 2005 at 05:55 UTC
If run retroactively, it would make this node mean nothing. Why would someone want to do run the code s/Perl/Perl/g? :)	[reply]
Re: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by Grygonos (Chaplain) on Aug 01, 2005 at 19:02 UTC
In the interests of free speech. I vote no on this piece of legislation. Let people say what they mean, and mean what they say. Grygonos	[reply]
Re^2: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by DrWhy (Chaplain) on Aug 01, 2005 at 20:21 UTC
Or in this case, let people think they are saying what they mean even though what they mean and what they say are not the same. Which means that by your vote you are preventing people from saying what they mean and meaning what they say, which is the exact opposite of what you claim to be doing! (I hope I didn't say that too mean...) ;) --DrWhy "If God had meant for us to think for ourselves he would have given us brains. Oh, wait..."	[reply]
Re: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by JSchmitz (Canon) on Aug 05, 2005 at 12:24 UTC
If they are trying to learn Perl have they not seen any books on the subject? Do the books have "PERL" written on the cover?? Nope. Think they would figure it out faster. Although I agree with other posts that say it shows the "newbicity" of the poster. cheers! Jeffery	[reply]
Re: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by insaniac (Friar) on Aug 04, 2005 at 08:04 UTC
neh, just wear glasses ;-) (or make a pre-cognitive view-hook in your brain which obliterates these pescy capslock mishabs :-/ ) to ask a question is a moment of shame to remain ignorant is a lifelong shame	[reply]
Re^2: s/PERL/Perl/g on new posts by insaniac (Friar) on Aug 04, 2005 at 13:06 UTC
hehehe... kids don't like humour anymore :-D MORE DOWNGRADES!!!! wiieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! to ask a question is a moment of shame to remain ignorant is a lifelong shame	[reply]

Back to Perl Monks Discussion