Re^4: Anonymous Monk?

[flexvault]

Hello tilly

I did have problems with my terminology, and previewed and changed my comments many times before hitting the create button.

But, you are an example of what I was trying to describe. You are here since 2000, and have shown by your rank, that perl is important to you, and I'm sure I will mentally add you to my list of 'valued' monks. You also know that I registered for perlmonks.org in 2008.

What you don't know, is that I rejected the whole concept as foolish and that I wrote in my log ... "Anon Monks ruin the whole thing". (NOTE: The only reason I looked at perlmonks.org, was that my google queries would take me to the site).

Fast forward to 2010, and I had a problem I just couldn't find an answer to. After about a week of searching/coding/testing, I resorted to trying perlmonks.org with my question. But this time, something magical happened, a monk (BrowserUk) not only gave me an answer, but gave a 1-line perl script that showed what was going on inside perl. And within 1-hour of my question.

Now that was something fantastic.

He helped me again a couple weeks ago, when I used his script to find what allocation of a array does. I work on lots of large files, and couldn't understand why reading a file into perl and then splitting it was so much faster that reading a line at a time. I used his script, and the initial array was 8 elements allocated, but then added 1 element at a time. So if you read a 1_000_000 line file, you called allocate approximately 999_993 (+/-). Implementing this, the loop reading the file improved by 34%.

So I'm back looking at perlmonks.org!

Thank you

[tilly]

Let me summarize the key points that I see. Your opinion was that anonymous monk ruined the whole idea of Perlmonks. Yet Perlmonks is here, clearly works, and has anonymous monks. Furthermore some of the people who have been part of making it work have expressed the opinion that the existence of anonymous monk is part of what makes it work.

My question for you is this. You have come to accept that your original take on Perlmonks was wrong. Do you care to challenge your beliefs about why it works?