Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Welcome to the Monastery
 
PerlMonks  

Re^3: Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing

by educated_foo (Vicar)
on Mar 05, 2011 at 23:58 UTC ( #891623=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^2: Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing
in thread Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing

Where did I say you made any money? You've made a name (or at least pseudonym) for yourself, so maybe you could make money on speaking and books -- I don't know, and I don't really care. Anyone loud and persistent enough can do that. But what kind of name have you made?
  • Comment on Re^3: Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing
by chromatic (Archbishop) on Mar 06, 2011 at 04:30 UTC
    But what kind of name have you made?

    Based on the people thanking me for writing the book, for giving electronic versions away for free, and recommending and sharing it with other people, I sleep very well at night. Hopefully a fair percentage of those readers go on to write good code and avoid the pitfalls in Perl 5 that would all too easily ensnare novices.

    Where did I say you made any money?

    You complain about various attempts to help people write good Perl, claiming that they're merely snake oil and marketing every chance you get. Clearly you think that the people doing so are either trying to sell something or really bad businesspeople who can't—or won't—do so. I don't understand that. Wouldn't your time be better spent actually building something people want to use than a bitter, one-man countermarketing campaign?

      Have to agree with chromatic, at least with the negative tone re: Modern Perl and BioPerl. As I mentioned elsewhere, I would really appreciate anything constructive from the BioPerl end, something beyond 'it sucks and it needs to be rewritten'. Seeing as BioPerl is pretty much being developed by a handful of developers who have other full-time jobs (myself, Lincoln, Jason, Dave Messina), not to mention the code base is huge and is used in a large number of other distributions (both CPAN and DarkPAN), it's kind of hard to dedicate ourselves to starting from scratch, even though we have started something along that path using Moose.

        Please see here for some suggestions. Make primitives (sequences and graphs) CPU- and memory-efficient, then build a sane interface on top of them.
      You have chosen some particular ways to write Perl that you believe are "good", and campaign tirelessly to make them the unquestioned dogma. This campaign takes a number of forms, and I know I'm not the only one who thinks they are tiresome and/or harmful to Perl. But we've been over this before, and will have to agree to disagree.
        ... we've been over this before, and will have to agree to disagree.

        I don't agree with your libel:

        ... and campaign tirelessly to make them the unquestioned dogma.

        How can I make it easier for you to read the book in question and find out what it really says?

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://891623]
help
Chatterbox?
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others imbibing at the Monastery: (3)
As of 2018-07-22 20:46 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    It has been suggested to rename Perl 6 in order to boost its marketing potential. Which name would you prefer?















    Results (455 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?