perl should be improved and perl6

J

jm

perl provides good things and bad ones.

In the good thing, such as:
* it is adapted for text processing
* it is poorly typed
* it is enough powerful with unicode
* provide arrays and hash and reference (and objects)
* transparently manage any kind of numbers.
* is C interfacable
* has basic network and IPC possibilities
* pack/unpack


In the bad things, such as:
* bytes/unicode confusion
* stack overflow within bad regular expression
* memory consumption (might be an issue when energy will be more expensive?)
* insufficient typing
* some portability issue, notably with function «system».
* some $@% issues.
* pack limitation: cannot just modify one byte.



perl6 looks like a cleanup of perl, but I am wondering:

how will memory be handled in perl6?
how will bytes be handled in perl6?
why perl6 encourages complex regex (as x become standard)?
how will perl6 address portability issues?
how will perl6 address IPC issues?
 
U

Uri Guttman

j> perl provides good things and bad ones.
j> In the good thing, such as:
j> * it is adapted for text processing
j> * it is poorly typed

me thinks you don't understand typing well. perl actually has stronger
typing than many langs. it just types on the variable type (scalar vs
array vs hash) instead of the data type.

j> * it is enough powerful with unicode
j> * provide arrays and hash and reference (and objects)
j> * transparently manage any kind of numbers.
j> * is C interfacable
j> * has basic network and IPC possibilities

basic??? cpan has modules for almost every protocol out there and IPC
support is all done too. you don't know perl well if you say this is basic.

j> * pack/unpack

that is a major part of perl? it is used but not that often by most
coders.


j> In the bad things, such as:
j> * bytes/unicode confusion
j> * stack overflow within bad regular expression

huh?? then don't write bad regexes. most likely if it blows up in perl
it will do worse in other langs.

j> * memory consumption (might be an issue when energy will be more expensive?)
what?? you are smoking very strange stuff. ram is cheap and always
getting cheaper. cpu speed is the power hog.

j> * insufficient typing

again, you don't know what you are talking about.

j> * some portability issue, notably with function «system».

proof of the last comment. system is the way to call external
programs. how could that POSSIBLY BE PORTABLE if the external programs
vary from box to box?

j> * some $@% issues.

no, you have some issues.

j> * pack limitation: cannot just modify one byte.

huh??? pack doesn't modify anything. pack converts a list of values to a
single buffer string. and the C format can pack a single byte.


j> perl6 looks like a cleanup of perl, but I am wondering:

j> how will memory be handled in perl6?

just find with true gc.

j> how will bytes be handled in perl6?

with stone tablets.

j> why perl6 encourages complex regex (as x become standard)?

wtf are you babbling about? perl6 has grammars and rules which blow away
all current regex engines. you need to read up on them. in fact you can
use a bunch of it in perl5 now with cpan modules.

j> how will perl6 address portability issues?

what issues?

j> how will perl6 address IPC issues?

again, what issues? there are no IPC issues, other than your
delusions. perl has fine IPC.

uri
 
X

xhoster

V.Ronans said:
Dr.Ruud said:
jm schreef:
perl [...] is poorly typed

By you? (Did you mean Perl by the way?)

Honestly, you know full well he was talking about the programming
language that pertains to this here news group, so feign ignorance? I
mean why is this even such an issue? Other places where people talk
about programming languages don't seem to care if it's all caps, first
only capitalized, or all lowercase, or what have you. I've seen Java,
java, and JAVA, cpp, C++, c++, c, C, python, PYTHON, cobol, Cobol,
COBOL, and the list goes on.

So why make such a stink about something so damn trivial?

Programming requires attention to detail. Well, good programming does,
anyway.

Xho

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked
advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate
this fact.
 
U

Uri Guttman

VR> [email protected] said:
V.Ronans said:
Dr.Ruud wrote:
jm schreef:

perl [...] is poorly typed

By you? (Did you mean Perl by the way?)

Honestly, you know full well he was talking about the programming
language that pertains to this here news group, so feign ignorance? I
mean why is this even such an issue? Other places where people talk
about programming languages don't seem to care if it's all caps,
first only capitalized, or all lowercase, or what have you. I've
seen Java, java, and JAVA, cpp, C++, c++, c, C, python, PYTHON,
cobol, Cobol, COBOL, and the list goes on.

So why make such a stink about something so damn trivial?

Programming requires attention to detail. Well, good programming
does, anyway.

VR> Yes, when _programming_, not with geenral petty conversations, such
VR> responses as "it's Perl not perl or PERL" serve NO PURPOSE. Arguably
VR> neither does this leg of the thread, but that because people like you
VR> refuse to pull out your heads for some fresh air.

oh please remove your own cranium from your rectum first. you don't seem
to be a regular here and misspelling perl is a common thing among
posters who also don't post according to this group's guidelines. it is
even covered in an FAQ why perl is not an acronym. yes, colloquially
perl and other langs can be in whatever case but seeing it wrong when it
can be corrected is not the crime you make it out to be. so get yourself
off this flame war now and shut up about it until you are someone who
regularly answers questions here. the rule is no bitching about how
others help here until you help regularly and well.

uri
 
J

John Bokma

V.Ronans said:
Dr.Ruud said:
jm schreef:
perl [...] is poorly typed

By you? (Did you mean Perl by the way?)

Honestly, you know full well he was talking about the programming
language that pertains to this here news group, so feign ignorance? I
mean why is this even such an issue? Other places where people talk
about programming languages don't seem to care if it's all caps,

There are already plenty of people who think PERL is an acronym (it's
not), so "we" like to avoid PERL.

Moreover, Perl is the programming language, and perl is the executable,
hence there is a good reason to be case sensitive. Hence, perl [...] is
poorly typed seems to refer to the executable, hence Dr. Ruud's question.
 
J

John Bokma

Yes, when _programming_, not with geenral petty conversations, such
responses as "it's Perl not perl or PERL" serve NO PURPOSE.

Yes they do:

A perl programmer is not the same as a Perl programmer.
A perl hacker is not the same as a Perl hacker.

And as I already wrote, PERL misleads people, they see PERL, and they
think it's an acronym.

I also use it as a quick way to see if someone knows what he/she is
talking about. Someone who claims to be a PERL programmer tells me that I
probably never want to maintain his/her code.
 
G

Gordon Etly

John said:
V.Ronans said:
Dr.Ruud said:
jm schreef:

perl [...] is poorly typed

By you? (Did you mean Perl by the way?)

Honestly, you know full well he was talking about the programming
language that pertains to this here news group, so feign ignorance? I
mean why is this even such an issue? Other places where people talk
about programming languages don't seem to care if it's all caps,

There are already plenty of people who think PERL is an acronym (it's
not), so "we" like to avoid PERL.

Moreover, Perl is the programming language, and perl is the
executable, hence there is a good reason to be case sensitive. Hence,
perl [...] is poorly typed seems to refer to the executable, hence
Dr. Ruud's question.

As someone else pointed out, in many other groups centered around a
particular programming language, no one pays this kind of attention of
people like your self seem to. Second, why is it people like yourself
can never give a straight answer as to why it is of such high
importance? If someone is a good programmer with the Perl language, does
it really make a difference how they spell it as long as they know what
they are doing? I mean you have people like Abigail who use their own
quote characters, Uri who can't use a bloody shift key, etc, and you're
worried about how some random bloke cases the word/term Perl?
 
G

Gordon Etly

John said:
Yes they do:

A perl programmer is not the same as a Perl programmer.
A perl hacker is not the same as a Perl hacker.

There is no real difference. Only someone who wants to be so incredibly
close minded might give a flying hoot.

You could say a normal person's mind might implicitly do a lc(..) on
those two lines and they end up eq'ing.
And as I already wrote, PERL misleads people, they see PERL, and they
think it's an acronym.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=PERL

The spelling "Perl" is preferred over the older "PERL" (even though
some explain the language's name as originating in the acronym for
"Practical Extraction and Report Language"). The program that
interprets/compiles Perl code is called "perl", typically
"/usr/local/bin/perl" or "/usr/bin/perl".
I also use it as a quick way to see if someone knows what he/she is
talking about. Someone who claims to be a PERL programmer tells me
that I probably never want to maintain his/her code.

That's a very poor measuring stick. Seems also hypocritical, considering
some of the more well known people in this group are known for doing
thing differently (Abigail for her interesting alternate forms of
quoting in replies, Uri for his inability to use the shift key, and so
forth), to judge some random bloke who may also choose to be different.
 
J

John Bokma

V.Ronans said:
Actually it is also an acronym:

From Wikipedia:
"The name is occasionally given as "PERL" (for Practical Extraction and
Report Language). Although the expansion has prevailed in many of today's
manuals, including the official Perl man page, it is merely a *backronym*.
The name does not officially stand for anything, so spelling it in all
caps is incorrect."


Robotic Operational Neohuman Assembled for Nocturnal Sabotage
 
U

Uri Guttman

VR> Uri Guttman wrote:

VR> I'm a regular reader.

not a regular contributor. that downgrades your comments here. by a lot.


VR> 2) I'm not sure you should be preaching about using proper grammar when
VR> you don't even bother to capitalize the first letter of your sentences.

WELL I CAN HIT THE SHIFT KEY IF YOU WANT!!!

VR> Actually it is also an acronym:

wrong.

VR> http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=perl

VR> The spelling "Perl" is preferred over the older "PERL" (even though some
VR> explain the language's name as originating in the acronym for "Practical
VR> Extraction and Report Language"). The program that interprets/compiles
VR> Perl code is called "perl", typically "/usr/local/bin/perl" or
VR> "/usr/bin/perl".

wrong again.

VR> http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?Acronym=perl&string=exact

VR> "Practical Extraction and Report Language"

wrong one more time.

VR> There is a known acronym PERL out there, so I really do not think you
VR> can blame people for using it.

and it was first named pearl after larry wall's mother. but that name
was already taken by another language so he dropped the 'a'.

FROM THE PERL FAQ (a more definitive source than the crap you posted):

What's the difference between "perl" and "Perl"?

One bit. Oh, you weren't talking ASCII? :) Larry now uses
"Perl" to signify the language proper and "perl" the
implementation of it, i.e. the current interpreter. Hence
Tom's quip that "Nothing but perl can parse Perl." You may
or may not choose to follow this usage. For example,
parallelism means "awk and perl" and "Python and Perl" look
OK, while "awk and Perl" and "Python and perl" do not. But
never write "PERL", because perl is not an acronym,
apocryphal folklore and post-facto expansions
notwithstanding.


VR> I NEVER said it was a crime. Please do NOT insert words into my
VR> mouth. My gripe has been and is with the way some of you choose
VR> to "correct" it; namely, the sarcastic attitude. Again, this
VR> serves no useful purpose other than to make such people you are
VR> attempting to correct perhaps look at you with a strange look and
VR> wonder why you care so much, especially when you don't even care
VR> enough to properly case your words.

you tone is worse than anyone who comments on perl vs PERL. so meet the
pot, kettle.

as for my casing, that is your problem. i choose to case my postings
this way. my documentation, POD, writing, teaching, slides are all cased
as others want them.

uri
 
U

Uri Guttman

GE> As someone else pointed out, in many other groups centered around a
GE> particular programming language, no one pays this kind of attention of
GE> people like your self seem to. Second, why is it people like yourself
GE> can never give a straight answer as to why it is of such high
GE> importance? If someone is a good programmer with the Perl language, does
GE> it really make a difference how they spell it as long as they know what
GE> they are doing? I mean you have people like Abigail who use their own
GE> quote characters, Uri who can't use a bloody shift key, etc, and you're
GE> worried about how some random bloke cases the word/term Perl?

because it is the newer users who need to learn the difference. saying
'perl' or 'PERL' has a bug are very different. being technically
accurate is a critical skill to a coder so using the correct name for
the language vs the compiler vs a backronym is important. if a perl
hacker wannabe can't get that right, they need to be told about it. i
have the same issue when i see jobs for 'PERL'. that is important to me
as i work in the job placement field and would never use that form.

uri
 
U

Uri Guttman

GE> http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=PERL

GE> The spelling "Perl" is preferred over the older "PERL" (even though
GE> some explain the language's name as originating in the acronym for
GE> "Practical Extraction and Report Language"). The program that
GE> interprets/compiles Perl code is called "perl", typically
GE> "/usr/local/bin/perl" or "/usr/bin/perl".


that is very wrong. see my other post about this. perl was never
originally an acronym and you can ask larry. hmm, maybe i should the
next time i have dinner with him.

GE> That's a very poor measuring stick. Seems also hypocritical, considering
GE> some of the more well known people in this group are known for doing
GE> thing differently (Abigail for her interesting alternate forms of
GE> quoting in replies, Uri for his inability to use the shift key, and so
GE> forth), to judge some random bloke who may also choose to be different.

you are saying the same garbage again. try to be original in your
flamage. me thinks i should also judge your perl code based on your poor
postings. do you have a cpan id?

uri
 
J

Johann Kappacher

Tim said:
Wait a second...let me see if I have this straight:

Poster #1 spells Perl "perl".

Poster #2 is a jerk about that.

Poster #3 calls poster #2 a jerk, and defends "perl".

You take exception to that, coming out strongly against those who
spell it "perl", while spelling it that way every time you
use it in your condemnation of people who spell it "perl"!?

Thank you, this is the most valuable posting in this thread.

People are spinning around with their thoughts, losing "the point"
because of their emotional outbreaks.

Ok, Uri is right in saying that the FAQ explains it well.
But the FAQ also states that you can follow the guideline ... or not.

Uri is writing "perl actually has stronger typing than many langs" and
(in a followup) "perl and other langs".

He is eager to participate in the flame war, shooting against
"non-regulars".

But I miss a statement saying like: "Well, I have mis-typed Perl, but
nonetheless, I defend a correct typing, because it makes sense and is
part of our Perl culture!"

--jk
 
B

Ben Bullock

A perl programmer is not the same as a Perl programmer. A perl hacker is
not the same as a Perl hacker.

This presents us with a serious problem. When we speak, we cannot
distinguish between capital letters and small letters. So there is a
danger of confusion, if we should tell people "I'm a Perl programmer",
they may make a mistake and think we are "perl programmers". Then all
hell will break loose. So if we say this rather than write it down, we
should be sure to always say "I'm a Perl with a capital P programmer" or
"I'm a perl with a small p hacker". Or, to reduce unnecessary wordiness,
we can carry a card with us when we speak, and whenever we say the word
"Perl" or "perl" in public, we can produce the card and point to the
correct version of the letter with our forefinger.
And as I already wrote, PERL misleads people, they see PERL, and they
think it's an acronym.

And then they invest all their life savings into PERL and loose it all,
or something?
 
A

A. Sinan Unur

John Bokma wrote: ....
Moreover, Perl is the programming language, and perl is the
executable, hence there is a good reason to be case sensitive.
Hence, perl [...] is poorly typed seems to refer to the
executable, hence Dr. Ruud's question.

As someone else pointed out, in many other groups centered around
a particular programming language, no one pays this kind of
attention of people like your self seem to.

Have you tried posting a question about a non-existence language
called C/C++ in comp.lang.c?

Think of the distinction between Perl and perl a clue-meter. We
already know the contributions Uri has made to this group and to my
work with his modules.

When an unknown poster shows his/her ignorance, someone tries to
give that person a hand by providing a correction. The response to
the correction helps us evaluate if it would ever be worth spending
our time answering questions by this person.

Sinan

--
A. Sinan Unur <[email protected]>
(remove .invalid and reverse each component for email address)

comp.lang.perl.misc guidelines on the WWW:
http://www.rehabitation.com/clpmisc/
 
J

Johann Kappacher

Uri said:
because it is the newer users who need to learn the difference. saying
'perl' or 'PERL' has a bug are very different. being technically
accurate is a critical skill to a coder so using the correct name for
the language vs the compiler vs a backronym is important. if a perl
hacker wannabe can't get that right, they need to be told about it.

Hi, I recognize your claim on this topic, but I do not back your behavior.

You cannot criticize the [pP]erl mis-typing of newbies and practice this
mis-typing yourself in the same news thread (and use such an emotional
wording).

As I have posted in a reply to Tim Smith's posting:
....
Ok, Uri is right in saying that the FAQ explains it well.
But the FAQ also states that you can follow the guideline ... or not.

Uri is writing "perl actually has stronger typing than many langs" and (in a followup) "perl and other langs".

He is eager to participate in the flame war, shooting against "non-regulars".

But I miss a statement saying like: "Well, I have mis-typed Perl, but nonetheless, I defend a correct typing, because it makes sense and is part of our Perl culture!"

--jk
 
G

Gordon Etly

David said:
[...]
As someone else pointed out, in many other groups centered around a
particular programming language, no one pays this kind of attention
of people like your self seem to.

Its a marker of if your inside the group of perl culture or out of
it. Its a short cut to find out if you have read and understood the
FAQ.

But it's a rather indicator. What is someone wants to be a little
different, even after having read the FAQ? What if they typed 'man perl'
or 'perldoc perl' early on in their Perl life and just went with the
first few lines:

$ perldoc perl | head -n 10
PERL(1) User Contributed Perl Documentation
PERL(1)
^^^^


NAME
perl - Practical Extraction and Report Language
^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This alone should make seeing "PERL" not surprising, weather one has
read the FAQ or not. If various regulars can be different in their own
way, it's rather hypocritical to bare down on not-so-regular people (or
are they... many people might actually be //regular readers//) in this
manner.

[...]
If someone is a good programmer with the Perl language, does
it really make a difference how they spell it as long as they know
what they are doing?

Because reading the FAQ, paying attention to detail and understanding
what people tell them are aspects of knowing how to program in Perl.

No, you can judge someone purely on grounds like that. If someone wants
to write "PERL", whether based on the man/perldoc page for "perl", that
should be their choice. It is unfair to assume they are 'unworthy'
simply because they want to me a little different. Again, some well
known members of this group do things differently as well (Abigail's
non-standard quoting, Uri's refusal to properly use the shift key and
such) yet it's a crime for others to be different in more or less the
same way?
You will find that people don't care about the spelling of random
words, its only when people start talking about Perl specific words
does it start to mattor.

Yes, but "PERL" and "Practical Extraction and Report Language" come fro
mthe man/perldoc page for "perl", how can one get more official then
something's own man page? Are you saying the FAQ for this group, a user
contributed document, as valvuable as it may be, carries more weight
then Perl's own man page?
 
G

Gordon Etly

A. Sinan Unur said:
John Bokma wrote: ...
Moreover, Perl is the programming language, and perl is the
executable, hence there is a good reason to be case sensitive.
Hence, perl [...] is poorly typed seems to refer to the
executable, hence Dr. Ruud's question.

As someone else pointed out, in many other groups centered around
a particular programming language, no one pays this kind of
attention of people like your self seem to.

Have you tried posting a question about a non-existence language
called C/C++ in comp.lang.c?

Yes I have. They are related languages. C++ is based on C. Most people
seem to understand that, while also understanding what sets them apart.
Think of the distinction between Perl and perl a clue-meter.

But that is just wrong. If the man/perldoc page for "perl" reads like,


$ perldoc perl | head -n 10
PERL(1) User Contributed Perl Documentation PERL(1)
^^^^

NAME
perl - Practical Extraction and Report Language
^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

then would not someone using it as such an acronym be in fact //more//
clue-ful [sic], having read the man/perdoc pages? I mean can the
FAQ/guidelines, a user created contribution, as valuable as it may be,
really carry more weight then Perl's own documentation?
We already know the contributions Uri has made to this group and to my
work with his modules.

That doesn't excuse his blatant hypocrisy; he himself uses "perl" when
telling people NOT to use it. Being a contributor doesn't mean one does
not have to follow what they preach.
When an unknown poster shows his/her ignorance, someone tries to
give that person a hand by providing a correction. The response to
the correction helps us evaluate if it would ever be worth spending
our time answering questions by this person.

Perhaps, but the point here is the correction itself is not necessarly
correct. Not if Perl's own man pages and perdoc mena anything.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,482
Members
44,901
Latest member
Noble71S45

Latest Threads

Top