Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • It's refreshing to highlight another perspective on program.

    I'm curious what you mean by "step up", though. You describe it like it's the same as working overtime, but also the key to be being a better programmer.
  • ...even geniuses become old koots, set in their way.

    Maybe that should be especially geniuses.

  • The book Elements of Programming with Perl [manning.com] uses a literate programming approach.

    There is a short paper about the tangler in the source code tarball at that link.

    John.
    --

  • I think this was really well written and thought out, thanks for taking the time.

    I think your point about the layers (like the Perl onion) of skill, interest, time, experience and commitments of programmers are especially on the mark. Many folks do have life (gasp!) outside of coding and technology. It doesn't make them too bad ;)

  • Leading Computer Scientists Agree... You're Doing It Completely Wrong [lemonodor.com].
    • I am no leading computer scientist, but I mostly agree with Knuth. Unit tests, mostly a waste of time. Reusable code is good, depending on the context. XP? Kill me now.
      • Yeah, but you eat sacred cows every day, so it's not exactly newsworthy when you say it. :)

        --
        J. David works really hard, has a passion for writing good software, and knows many of the world's best Perl programmers
        • Yeah, but you eat sacred cows every day, so it's not exactly newsworthy when you say it. :)

          Well, so does Knuth. The real difference is that he is Knuth, and I am not. :-)
          • It's also usually more entertaining when you do it.

            --
            J. David works really hard, has a passion for writing good software, and knows many of the world's best Perl programmers
  • He also said Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.

    So I would have thought he would be sympathetic to testing. Either the reason is as you say, he is a high-flying academic, or perhaps I didn't understand what he was trying to say in the saying.

    Perhaps he is like the haskellers who feel getting it to compile is the evidence they need that it works. And that any uncertainty you have you have to live with.

    Perhaps the way he understands bugs is different.