Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
There's more than one way to do things
 
PerlMonks  

Inline::Python sucks

by Anonymous Monk
on May 14, 2010 at 22:45 UTC ( #840076=perlquestion: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

Anonymous Monk has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

I just tried Inline::Python because I thought it would work. I run windows with strawberry Perl, I Installed it like I usually do(Inline::Python) then I gave it a spin. It didn't work. Someone tell the one who wrote this module that it doesn't work please, it deserves complete humiliation. I would literally throw tomatoes at him/her/them.

Please, if your module doesn't work, don't put it on CPAN. There is no point in bragging about CPAN being very big and having a lot of modules if they don't work. I read in so many places that Perl people are bragging about how big CPAN is and how good it is, but really... that's not where it's at. Thanks a lot and next time you upload something on CPAN and you know it doesn't work, delete it, CPAN doesn't need your buggy/failing code.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Inline::Python sucks
by toolic (Bishop) on May 14, 2010 at 23:33 UTC
    Someone tell the one who wrote this module that it doesn't work please
    There are 3 much more effective ways to notify the author of problems than ranting here at PerlMonks:
    1. Rate the module on CPAN ratings.
    2. Submit a bug report on CPAN.
    3. Send an email to the author.
    There are links and info at Inline::Python. The 1st 2 require that you create an account, which judging by your anonymity, may be a challenge for you. It would also require a little more effort than "It didn't work.".
    I just tried Inline::Python because I thought it would work.
    The CPAN Testers provide plenty of indicators to a module's quality, as do the bug reports, both of which can be found at Inline::Python. The next time you try to use a new module, you should glance at them before you take the plunge.
    how big CPAN is and how good it is, but really... that's not where it's at.
    There are plenty of great modules on CPAN. What... you expect everything to be great? Sometimes you get what you pay for. It's free!
      In that order, please:
      1. submit a bug report
      2. submit a patch
      3. give the author some time to solve the issue
      4. and finally, if the author is unresponsive or just don't want to solve the issue, then you can complain publicly about the bad status of the module.

      It's Open Source, even a non working module is not something useless, it is something you can repair yourself and make functional for much less effort than writing the whole thing from scratch (well, mostly).

      Using CPAN Ratings (or any other forum) to complaint about broken modules before letting the author know and solve any issue, well, I think this way of doing is very disrespectful.

      <quote>Sometimes you get what you pay for. It's free!</quote>

      that's not an excuse man, you can pay and get shitty software for money also.

      it's just that there's a lot of code on CPAN, if someone puts code there that doesn't work he's contributing to wasted time + annoying other people who install his module only to find out it was a turd.

      there should be some people verifying all CPAN modules by hand and deciding if they go in or in a waiting queue. CPAN needs some filtering, otherwise it's going to turn into a big lake of sh*t.

        there should be some people verifying all CPAN modules

        There are

        CPAN needs some filtering

        Filtering? No. That would prevent anyone from using it because it doesn't work in your environment. And you got told it wouldn't work in your environment by the installer before it even got installed (in the form of failed tests), so it's not like your time got wasted.

        Maybe the search tools could be improved, though. Any suggestions?

          A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
        there should be some people verifying all CPAN modules ...

        I support your idea ...

        ...for the beginning there should be some people verifying all postings of Anonymous Monks by hand and deciding if they go in or in a waiting queue. The monastery needs some filtering , otherwise it's going to turn into a big lake of tr*lls!

        Cheers Rolf

        8)

        CPAN needs some filtering
        No, it doesn't. CPAN is just a distribution mechanism, nothing more, nothing less. And because it's nothing more than a distribution mechanism, anyone can build something on top of it.

        If you think it's worthwhile to have a filtering system: build one.

Re: Inline::Python sucks
by ikegami (Pope) on May 15, 2010 at 00:03 UTC
    What a moot post. Not only is it blatantly wrong — the module does work, just not for you — you didn't provide any information that could help fix the problem you are having.
Re: Inline::Python sucks
by Anonymous Monk on May 15, 2010 at 01:18 UTC
    Someone tell the one who wrote this module that it doesn't work please, it deserves complete humiliation. I would literally throw tomatoes at him/her/them.

    Someone? Why don't you be that someone?

    This rant has a heavy stench of a the impossible idiot challenge, where a clever idiot proclaims something to be impossible as a challenge to the group, so he can crowd-source a neatly wrapped solution refuting the impossibility.

    Nice try.

Re: Inline::Python sucks
by Ultimatt (Acolyte) on Nov 23, 2011 at 13:54 UTC

    Sorry for resurrecting an old post, but this came up in one of my searches and I feel the module needs some praise...

    Pretty sure Anon tried use Inline::Python; rather than bothering to understand what they were doing and instead do use Inline 'Python'; which works, with Inline delegating to whatever module you need AFAIK?

    I'm really impressed with this module! I just used it to hook up some phylogenetic tree visualisation stuff in Python right into my Perl script... worked first time and even bridging to a Python object that is doing crazy QT and X-windows stuff.

    #!/usr/bin/env perl use strict; use Inline 'Python' => 'from ete2a1 import Tree'; my $tree = new Tree(shift()); $tree->show();
    That is incredibly cool, and works! Up pops the Python interactive window for messing about with a tree passed in.
Re: Inline::Python sucks
by pemungkah (Priest) on May 17, 2010 at 21:20 UTC
    First: You're using open source software. Part of the bargain (and the value) of it is that you have everything you need to change it, fix it, upgrade it, or make something completely new from it. All you are asked to do is give credit ... and be willing to do some work yourself if you need more than the gift you were given provides.

    Second: Insulting someone anonymously and behind their back? Classy, real classy. At this point, a decent and intelligent person would say something like, "You know, I was upset because I really needed this to work, and what I said was out of line. Sorry."

    Advice: if you get into a habit of expressing yourself this way and trying to justify it, at some point you will do it somewhere that you're not anonymous. It's something that could cost you a job, or potentially valuable friends.

      I cannot seem to install this module on windows using cpan. Does anybody know of an alternative for windows?

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: perlquestion [id://840076]
Approved by sflitman
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others about the Monastery: (6)
As of 2019-11-13 04:37 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    Strict and warnings: which comes first?



    Results (68 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?