Tomorrow I fly to Portland for about a week and a half and I'll have little to no internet connectivity during that time. Since I've just moved into my house in London, I've had little internet connectivity for the past week, so there's a wee bit of withdrawal here.
In other news, a couple of weeks ago I was reading about immutable objects (in Haskell) and while I don't know much Haskell, the idea sounded intriguing. When you create an object, its data is "frozen". Need to change a value? Clone the object with the new data. Not only would this likely prevent side-effects, it might be perfect for threaded programming. Also, the notion of whether or not two objects are the same becomes useless. If they represent the same data, they are the same object.
I see that Stevan Little has produced Class::MOP::Immutable, but I haven't looked into it much and I don't know if it would be as transparent as what I'm thinking about.
I also need to write up a brief bit about how to use ORMs safely. I'm sure it would be controversial, but I keep seeing people adopt ORMs, dump the idea of OO and use OO wrappers around what are effectively glorified, persistent structs. Yuck. I've hinted about this in The AuthenticationFairy and I see that Piers Cawley seems to approve. In a nutshell, the idea would be "create a reasonable OO system and use the ORM underneath this sytem."