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.
  • Your comment on his post gives me the impression that you didn't understand Brooks's essay either. In my experience, almost no one does.

    I read the essay two nights ago, and all I have to say is that--whether due to Moore's Law or whatever, I don't care--I'm at least an order of magnitude more productive doing test-driven development with a language that supplies automatic memory management and the creation of domain-appropriate abstractions than I would be with the best language and platform available fo

    • I'm at least an order of magnitude more productive doing test-driven development with a language that supplies automatic memory management and the creation of domain-appropriate abstractions than I would be

      Of course, Brooke's assertion was that no single advancement would yield an order of magnitude improvement. You listed a combination of advancements.

      --
      J. David works really hard, has a passion for writing good software, and knows many of the world's best Perl programmers
      • Indeed. How curious then that a development process such as, oh, extreme programming, is obviously no silver bullet.

        (Or it could be that a lot of people haven't actually read and thought about the essay.)

        • I think my original weblog entry was probably mostly out of a minor annoyance about how some people talk about XP, and I felt it on that particular day for whatever reason. That was back when I was making a lot of weblog entries, basically taking something I thought about for thirty seconds and just saying it. It's the sort of thing I would have mentioned at a party but would not have been interested in talking about for more than five minutes.

          I used to treat blogs more like "hey, here's this thing I thought as I was reading the news this morning", probably expecting that people would either say "oh, that's interesting" or "that's crap" and move on. Well, as most of us know, it doesn't work like that. Despite the ease in which I can publish, that doesn't mean I should. I rarely post to the O'Reilly weblog now just for that reason. By publishing something, even in a blog, I'm attaching the "This is important" flag to it. I just don't have many things that deserve that falg, though (including this post and the original one).

          Despite the revolution in publishing, we haven't caught up on the reading side. Any stupid thing I say in a blog gets elevated far beyond its importance. That might be partly due to my ability as an author, but that's not the whole story. People want to classify things (heh, tags, &c.), so when they read a post, they need to know which tag to apply to it. Do they use the "Asshole" or "Prophet" tag? Do they give it the thumbs down or thumbs up digg? Sometimes, I think there should be a neutral tag, such as "Yeah, whatever", or a neutral digg.

          In reality, I should just ignore Google Blogsearch. That's what Randal tells me at least. :)