"Selling" Perl (i.e. getting the boss to let me install it)

[Willem]

John Bokma wrote:
) Wouldn't amaze me if those managers had in many cases a point. Sorry about
) that news, it's probably not what you want to hear :-D

s/news/opinion/

) For the record, I am a freelance developer, and have learned a long time
) ago that productivity is sooner limited by that gray stuff between the
) ears than anything else. Probably because I had so often to make do what
) was available.
)
) I would have no problem with coding in Notepad. Of course I would miss
) some things (and probably would write some small Perl scripts to fix
) that), but most of my coding is typing out stuff. Thinking happens (here)
) on paper .

Most of my work consists of working on existing code, finding out where to
make changes, finding out how things work, and then making small changes in
several places. In such cases, certain features are invaluable.

In any case, you're talking about 'problem coding on other than favourite
editor' while I'm talking about 'being faster in favourite editor'.

So if most of your work is typing out stuff then, yes, you won't be much
faster in another editor. But if most of your work is *editing* stuff,
then I *will* be much faster, in my opinion.


SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT

 

[Charlton Wilbur]

W> Some managers believe that the opinions of a developer, on issues
W> such as the correlation between editor familiarity and
W> productivity, should not be taken seriously. Those aren't
W> serious managers and I would stay away.

Indeed. On the other hand, this is what interviews are for: they are
just as much for the potential employee to evaluate the company as for
the company to evaluate the potential customer. I've turned down jobs
because they were needlessly restrictive about work environment and
development environment, because I know what I like and I know what I
find annoying, and I don't really want to spend 8 hours a day being
annoyed because my manager thinks my comfort level with the tools I'm
using is less important than a foolish consistency on everyone's desktop.

I mean, we're working with *text files*. "Standardizing" on a single
editor, or even on a single platform, is dim. The group I work in has
people on Macs, Windows, and Linux, and I couldn't tell you what most of
the people use for editors. This is a good thing.

Charlton

 

[John Bokma]

John Bokma wrote:
) Wouldn't amaze me if those managers had in many cases a point. Sorry
about ) that news, it's probably not what you want to hear :-D

s/news/opinion/

) For the record, I am a freelance developer, and have learned a long
time ) ago that productivity is sooner limited by that gray stuff
between the ) ears than anything else. Probably because I had so often
to make do what ) was available.
)
) I would have no problem with coding in Notepad. Of course I would
miss ) some things (and probably would write some small Perl scripts
to fix ) that), but most of my coding is typing out stuff. Thinking
happens (here) ) on paper .

Most of my work consists of working on existing code, finding out
where to make changes, finding out how things work, and then making
small changes in several places. In such cases, certain features are
invaluable.

Which ones?

In any case, you're talking about 'problem coding on other than
favourite
editor' while I'm talking about 'being faster in favourite editor'.

I don't think that I am faster in my favourite editor TextPad, than in,
say for example Vim (I am learning Emacs, but if I have edited a few files
in it, I don't think I am faster or slower compared to TextPad).

Of course, if I have to switch from TextPad to, say Kate, today, I have to
get used to Kate. But after some time (a week or so), IMO I *should* be as
fast as with TextPad.

So if most of your work is typing out stuff then, yes, you won't be
much faster in another editor. But if most of your work is *editing*
stuff, then I *will* be much faster, in my opinion.

I don't see why yet. The time I had to use vim a lot was on a huge (650+
inhouse Perl modules) code maintainance project. I was very used to
TextPad back then, but in no time I was splitting windows in vim, and
jumping to lines with issues.

 

[Willem]

John Bokma wrote:
)> Most of my work consists of working on existing code, finding out
)> where to make changes, finding out how things work, and then making
)> small changes in several places. In such cases, certain features are
)> invaluable.
)
) Which ones?

Search, replace, macro recording on the fly, diffing between split
windows, and all the syntax highlighting and autoindenting and such.
Plus the simple extensibility with a scripting language, which a vi
user already knows most of, because it's basically the same as the
editing commands.

Of course, most editors have that stuff, but if you use all of it, it
takes a lot more time to learn all the relevant keyboard shortcuts to
do the things you want to do.

)> In any case, you're talking about 'problem coding on other than
)> favourite
)> editor' while I'm talking about 'being faster in favourite editor'.
)
) I don't think that I am faster in my favourite editor TextPad, than in,
) say for example Vim (I am learning Emacs, but if I have edited a few files
) in it, I don't think I am faster or slower compared to TextPad).

The big advantage vim has over most other editors is that it can be
completely controlled from thust the basic alphanumeric keys, so you don't
have to lift your hands from the main part of the keyboard to do stuff.

Then there is the advantage that all the editing commands can be used
in conjunction with all the movement commands, making possible a lot
of advanced editing shortcuts that most other editors don't have.

Downside is the steep learning curve of having to memorize all the
commands, so switching *to* vim is usually not recommended.

) Of course, if I have to switch from TextPad to, say Kate, today, I have to
) get used to Kate. But after some time (a week or so), IMO I *should* be as
) fast as with TextPad.

I'm not familiar with Kate but I assume they are both quite similar.
Vim, on the other hand, is quite different as mentioned before. Of
course, ths modern versions have mouse menus and stuff, but it's the
keyboard commands that set it apart. Not using the mouse -> BIG speedup.

)> So if most of your work is typing out stuff then, yes, you won't be
)> much faster in another editor. But if most of your work is *editing*
)> stuff, then I *will* be much faster, in my opinion.
)
) I don't see why yet. The time I had to use vim a lot was on a huge (650+
) inhouse Perl modules) code maintainance project. I was very used to
) TextPad back then, but in no time I was splitting windows in vim, and
) jumping to lines with issues.

Were you using the keyboard commands, or the menu entries ?


SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT

 

[John Bokma]

John Bokma wrote:
[..]

Of course, most editors have that stuff, but if you use all of it, it
takes a lot more time to learn all the relevant keyboard shortcuts to
do the things you want to do.

Another thing a lot of editors share is the ability to redefine the
keyboard shortcuts (Although it's something I try to avoid).

The big advantage vim has over most other editors is that it can be
completely controlled from thust the basic alphanumeric keys, so you
don't have to lift your hands from the main part of the keyboard to do
stuff.

Only thing I can think off that requires the mouse in TextPad is moving
the splitter. But I don't mind to move my hands away from the keyboard
now and then, I have no problems with the mouse, and some things I do
faster with it.

Downside is the steep learning curve of having to memorize all the
commands, so switching *to* vim is usually not recommended.

Heh, I can't see why.

) Of course, if I have to switch from TextPad to, say Kate, today, I
have to ) get used to Kate. But after some time (a week or so), IMO I
*should* be as ) fast as with TextPad.

I'm not familiar with Kate but I assume they are both quite similar.

Nor am I (on purpose, but I've used it a few times, some time ago), and
no idea how similar they are. But that was somewhat my point

Vim, on the other hand, is quite different as mentioned before.

I can't see why, or maybe I am too used to vi/vim .

Of
course, ths modern versions have mouse menus and stuff, but it's the
keyboard commands that set it apart. Not using the mouse -> BIG
speedup.

To me that depends on what I am doing, and I think that I am experienced
enough with my current editor that I automatically make the right
decision between keyboard and mouse.

) I don't see why yet. The time I had to use vim a lot was on a huge
(650+ ) inhouse Perl modules) code maintainance project. I was very
used to ) TextPad back then, but in no time I was splitting windows in
vim, and ) jumping to lines with issues.

Were you using the keyboard commands, or the menu entries ?

Keyboard. I don't use the mouse much while editing in TextPad except
when it works faster (or is the only way)

 

[Charlton Wilbur]

JB> Which ones?

Incremental search. Search & replace using regular expressions. Code
narrowing or folding (depending on what your editor calls it).
Parenthesis/brace/bracket matching.

Secondarily, Emacs keybindings for keyboard navigation. I imprinted
on them over a decade ago; they're in my muscle memory now.

Charlton

 

[Willem]

John Bokma wrote:
) Another thing a lot of editors share is the ability to redefine the
) keyboard shortcuts (Although it's something I try to avoid).

Well okay, I'll concede that. But still you have to use key combinations
(ctrl-this, alt-that, I imagine ?)

)> The big advantage vim has over most other editors is that it can be
)> completely controlled from thust the basic alphanumeric keys, so you
)> don't have to lift your hands from the main part of the keyboard to do
)> stuff.
)
) Only thing I can think off that requires the mouse in TextPad is moving
) the splitter. But I don't mind to move my hands away from the keyboard
) now and then, I have no problems with the mouse, and some things I do
) faster with it.

Yes, but you have to use the *whole* keyboard, not just the alphanumeric
bits. That makes a bit of difference.

)> Vim, on the other hand, is quite different as mentioned before.
)
) I can't see why, or maybe I am too used to vi/vim .

Well, there is still the use of easy macro recording, the ease of
combining almost any edit command with almost any move command, and
the ease of adding custom scripts. Of course, emacs has the first
and the last as well, and probably the second too.
Downside of emacs is escape-meta-alt-control-shift


In any case, perhaps I could get to comparable speed with another editor,
but I very much doubt it would take me only a week to do so, even if I were
to spend the whole week doing nothing but familiarize myself with the
editor. I tend to use *a lot* of more powerful functionality of vim,
learned from years of working with it. Perhaps all of that is also
available in other editors (although I actually doubt all of it is) but
that is *a lot* of stuff to relearn.


SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT

 

[Peter J. Holzer]

You have limited access rights, and Perl will run with your rights. Hence
it doesn't provide you with any magic.

On the other hand, "Perl will run with your rights" also means "Perl
will run with your full rights". Whatever you can do, any perl script
you execute can do, too.

So for a security-conscious admin that boils down to: "can I trust that
user not to download and execute potentially harmful scripts?" Of course
if an admin lets a user download and run exe files, he shouldn't worry
about perl scripts - the danger is exactly the same.

hp

 

[John Bokma]

John Bokma wrote:
) Another thing a lot of editors share is the ability to redefine the
) keyboard shortcuts (Although it's something I try to avoid).

Well okay, I'll concede that. But still you have to use key
combinations (ctrl-this, alt-that, I imagine ?)

Since most editors are mode-less, yes.

) Only thing I can think off that requires the mouse in TextPad is
moving ) the splitter. But I don't mind to move my hands away from the
keyboard ) now and then, I have no problems with the mouse, and some
things I do ) faster with it.

Yes, but you have to use the *whole* keyboard, not just the
alphanumeric bits. That makes a bit of difference.

I've know idea. I have to press Shift now and then as well. Doesn't
bother me that much. I never needed a high typing speed when coding.
Maybe I am a slow coder. Even when writing documentation I don't type
full speed (like for example while chatting, or posting to Usenet).

)> Vim, on the other hand, is quite different as mentioned before.
)
) I can't see why, or maybe I am too used to vi/vim .

Well, there is still the use of easy macro recording, the ease of
combining almost any edit command with almost any move command, and
the ease of adding custom scripts. Of course, emacs has the first
and the last as well, and probably the second too.
Downside of emacs is escape-meta-alt-control-shift

Emacs is entirely programmable, so if you don't like that, change it. Or
use vile. From what I understand features first in vile made it back to
vi(m).

In any case, perhaps I could get to comparable speed with another
editor, but I very much doubt it would take me only a week to do so,
even if I were to spend the whole week doing nothing but familiarize
myself with the editor.

I recently changed from a Latin American keyboard back to an US one (in
our house we have like 4 or even 5 different keyboard layouts), and it
took me about a week to get used to it. The two weeks (I think I
mentioned 2) was a guess, based on what I do when working on code. Maybe
I don't use my editors to the fullest, I don't know. But what I do most
while coding is typing characters part of the code.

I tend to use *a lot* of more powerful
functionality of vim, learned from years of working with it. Perhaps
all of that is also available in other editors (although I actually
doubt all of it is) but that is *a lot* of stuff to relearn.

I am going to use Emacs full time later this month, so maybe I'll come
back on "two weeks". And later on I want to extend my knowledge of vi as
well (I probably am just going to switch to vim for a few months).