Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Keep It Simple, Stupid
 
PerlMonks  

response to "The Perl Community - a mixed bag of sometimes intollerance and sometimes fantastic help"

by daxim (Deacon)
on Jul 24, 2019 at 07:19 UTC ( #11103270=perlmeditation: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

mje says he was ridiculed and alludes to intolerance (in the heading):
GIven my new enthusiasm for the Perl community I dare to post an issue I was having to IRC on #perl-help and it all fell down. [] anyone posting in #perl-help, needs help and I'd forgotten that certain people view this channel as a shooting ground where you pour ridicule on posters "who don't understand their problem" - of course they don't or why would they post on #perl-help. I got some helpful comments but I also got the ridicule.
That sounds untypical for #perl-help, in which I occasionally participate on both the Q and A sides. (There's my disclosure of bias.) mje did not substantiate, so I went and looked what happened. I did not find ridicule, not even a heated discussion. I notice I am confused.

I decided to post the log because the Perl community as a whole was blamed, not individuals, and in order to provide accurate first-hand information so that anyone can form their own opinion.

2019-07-23 18:47:42 mje__ I have a strange warning that I cannot + provide a runnable example for. The code "if (defined($match->{in_co +ntrol}) && ($match->{in_control} == 1))" ends up issuing a warning sa +ying "Use of uninitialized value in numeric eq (==)" but I cannor und +erstand how this can happen. $match is defined and even if it wasn't +I'd expect a warning saying trying to deref and undef. I don't think +it is autovivification as my tests show 2019-07-23 18:47:42 mje__ defined doesn't do this. Any ideas? 2019-07-23 18:48:44 mje__ Perl 5.24.4 2019-07-23 18:56:48 alh in_control could have operator overloa +ding 2019-07-23 18:57:00 alh Alternatively, the warning isn't happe +ning where you think it is which seems more likely 2019-07-23 18:57:21 alh Line numbers can be wrong if it's part + of a giant if () { } elsif () { } else {} block 2019-07-23 18:57:35 alh So it could be a different conditional + triggering it 2019-07-23 18:58:54 mje__ Simple hash ref, so no overloading. Th +e warning seems pretty good since the line mentioned contains an == 2019-07-23 18:59:58 alh Is it part of a multi-line conditional +? 2019-07-23 19:00:02 alh Can you show us more of the code 2019-07-23 19:00:08 mst the warning is happening somewhere els +e 2019-07-23 19:00:10 mst 99% chance 2019-07-23 19:02:28 mje__ Here is what it looks like now https:/ +/pastebin.com/fsTnLRaS, the only thing changed from when the warning +was output was defined changed to exists 2019-07-23 19:02:29 Repaster Repasted text from mje__: http +://perl.bot/p/mmydbc 2019-07-23 19:03:03 alh That's using exists 2019-07-23 19:03:04 alh not defined 2019-07-23 19:03:07 alh So it can exist and e undef 2019-07-23 19:03:13 alh Which is your problem 2019-07-23 19:03:46 mje__ I said, the original was defined when +the warning was issued and what I pasted was afterwards when it was c +hanged to exists 2019-07-23 19:04:48 mje__ the change from defined to exists is l +ikely wrong but the warning came from the defined case 2019-07-23 19:06:29 alh Can you show more context? 2019-07-23 19:12:38 mje__ https://pastebin.com/sYC3XR31 2019-07-23 19:12:39 Repaster Repasted text from mje__: http +://perl.bot/p/t8p5x4 2019-07-23 19:16:48 alh before line 18 warn the value of $exis +ting_match->{in_control} 2019-07-23 19:17:01 alh Beore line 14 do the same for $events{ +$event_id}->{event_status_id} 2019-07-23 19:17:05 alh That may be where the real warning is +coming from 2019-07-23 19:22:02 mje__ ok, so the crux of the opinion is the +line number is possibly wrong and so other == tests could be at fault +? 2019-07-23 19:24:47 mst the crux of the opinion is "you're con +fused about *something* 2019-07-23 19:24:51 alh Yes. And you can figure out by adding +debug everywhere 2019-07-23 19:24:57 mst I'd probably apply warn + Data::Dumper 2019-07-23 19:25:12 alh If you think $x->{foo} == 1 is warning +, warn reight before that conditional, warn inside that conditional, +warn after that conditional 2019-07-23 19:25:31 alh Where the unintialized value warning a +ppears in regards to what you've added should help you track it down 2019-07-23 19:28:21 Grinnz source filters are also known to screw + up line numbers 2019-07-23 19:29:32 mst oh. yes. if you have 'use Switch;' in +that code, you can assume all line numbers are wrong 2019-07-23 19:30:00 Grinnz (and in that case, that it also caused + the error) 2019-07-23 19:31:00 mje__ Unfortunately this is code working on +live data and although it is possible to play it back the playback is +n't EXACTLY as it was live. We don't use Switch. I hadn't considered +the warning line number was wrong so I've got something to work on. T +hanks 2019-07-23 19:31:43 Grinnz there are still some core bugs that ma +ke wrong line numbers too 2019-07-23 19:34:35 alh Also if a comment like this is anywher +e in the file: 2019-07-23 19:34:38 alh # line 5 10 2019-07-23 19:35:07 alh Or even: 2019-07-23 19:35:09 alh # line 10 2019-07-23 19:35:12 mst honestly I still thing you're just con +fused about the data
Timestamps are in Europe/Vienna timezone. The log is complete and unmodified. I'd appreciate replies of confirmation that it is so.
  • Comment on response to "The Perl Community - a mixed bag of sometimes intollerance and sometimes fantastic help"
  • Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: response to "The Perl Community - a mixed bag of sometimes intollerance and sometimes fantastic help"
by marto (Archbishop) on Jul 24, 2019 at 09:49 UTC

    I don't use the perl irc channels, I don't know any of the people involved. The response below is purely based on the bpo post and the data you've provided.

    "I did not find ridicule, not even a heated discussion."

    I don't see it either. The blog post states:

    By the vary nature, anyone posting in #perl-help, needs help and I'd forgotten that certain people view this channel as a shooting ground where you pour ridicule on posters "who don't understand their problem" - of course they don't or why would they post on #perl-help.

    Reading the conversation posted above I do see people suggest that there's either a data problem causing confusion, or pointing out that there are a bunch of reasons which make this situation more confusing, stating some of them and a strategy for debugging what's actually going on.

    I do know from first hand experience that people who are have worked closely with a code base or product for a long time can take offence to suggestions that something isn't being done right. Angry responses of "I've been doing it this way for 20 years!", when pointing out a critical security problem. It happens. It's often hard to take a step back and see the situation through someone else's eyes.

    I believe this is just a human thing, one of the complex problems unfortunately. So many contributing factors, perception differs, sometimes people have unrealistic expectations and read things that aren't there. Throw in language barriers, mood (people are often frustrated when asking for help). There's a whole mess of reasons contributing to misinterpretations. One thing I noticed when attending TPC last year in Glasgow, some people made complaints about being offended by some things, but let other arguably equally offensive things slide.

      perception differs

      This. AFAICS the headline is "Someone on IRC preceives ridicule from someone else on IRC and complains about it on another platform entirely." and this is news I can happily ignore.

Re: response to "The Perl Community - a mixed bag of sometimes intollerance and sometimes fantastic help"
by haj (Chaplain) on Jul 24, 2019 at 19:12 UTC

    marto wrote, and hippo quoted, a good observation:

    perception differs

    So I consider discussing a person's perception in another forum to be a rather fruitless exercise. On the other hand, there's mst's direct reply to the blog post: This reply is a wonderful example for someone who understands that perception differs, and who took an active step towards de-escalation towards the same audience where the issue was presented.

    Couldn't we just leave it at that?

Re: response to "The Perl Community - a mixed bag of sometimes intollerance and sometimes fantastic help"
by LanX (Archbishop) on Jul 24, 2019 at 08:32 UTC
    Hi Daxim,

    I'm confused. If this is a "response", shouldn't it be done in the same channel, namely blogs.perl.org ?

    Not sure if elevating this to a wider audience is helping the cause.

    Cheers Rolf
    (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
    Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice

      I think it's appropriate to post this here, asking different people in the wider community what their perception of the wider issue is.

        If that is the motivation, I'm less confused.

        Cheers Rolf
        (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
        Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice

      I don't want to deal with bpo anymore for technical and social reasons. If you are able to reply on bpo, then you have my bless()ing to leave a link to here.
        > then you have my bless()ing to leave a link to here.

        I'm neither in BPO nor IRC.

        Cheers Rolf
        (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
        Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice

Re: response to "The Perl Community - a mixed bag of sometimes intollerance and sometimes fantastic help"
by 1nickt (Abbot) on Jul 24, 2019 at 16:33 UTC

    I replied to the blog post.


    The way forward always starts with a minimal test.

      Your reply was not germane. You fed the apparently falsified victimhood. Alluding the monastery is a safe space is also a strategy prone to backfiring.

      Anyone who claims to have been abused or victimized needs to provide clear, full citation. Accusations without evidence are just gossip. In my estimation, people who make claims like this without presenting the entire cloth are, in light of full context, the actual bad actor as often as not.

        Hum. I believe my post was germane as its main point to the OP was that he had no right to complain about how he was treated since he already knew it was going to happen.

        I read the IRC thread, and have had several experiences that are identical. The OP there asked a question and got the ubiquitous guru/troll's classic scornful and derogatory put-down. There was no falsification. If people respond to questioners like that here they are reprimanded; in IRC that is not the case(*), for whatever reason (I guess because the guru/troll's company hosts the IRC server?) and it is most definitely a hostile environment even if you can get answers there.

        (*) In fact I have more than once been contacted off-line by another IRC poster apologizing for the guru/troll's behaviour, including e.g. by the lead maintainer of a major Perl framework (to which the guru/troll had in the past been a contributor) which publishes the IRC channel as the helpline. Now if such a senior developer feels that he cannot stand up publicly to the guru/troll's haranguing, what chance does a n00b have? Not many have skin thick enough to run the gauntlet of scorn in order to get an answer, and why should they have to?


        The way forward always starts with a minimal test.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: perlmeditation [id://11103270]
Approved by marto
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chilling in the Monastery: (7)
As of 2019-09-16 17:13 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    The room is dark, and your next move is ...












    Results (196 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?