Slashdot Mirror


Perl Is Undead

Ptolemarch writes At the Yet Another Perl Conference beginning today in Orlando, the first keynote squarely blamed Slashdot for starting the "Perl is Dead" meme in 2005. Let's be clear: if Perl was ever dead, it must now be undead. If you can't be at YAPC, you can still watch it live.

34 of 283 comments (clear)

  1. $_ to that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Congregation: $_
    Pastor: $_.

    1. Re:$_ to that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The people of Perl 6 are tolerant and accepting.

      That's quite a broad brush you're painting with there.

      Discrimination and hatred have no place in the modern world.

      Agreed.

      Perl 6 is about love, care, tolerance and friendship.

      Now I think you're getting carried away... I thought it was a multi-purpose scripting language, not a big hug.

    2. Re:$_ to that? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      Perl 6 is about love, care, tolerance and friendship.

      Well, it clearly isn't about deadlines!

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:$_ to that? by Mjlner · · Score: 3, Funny

      Perl 6 is about love, care, tolerance and friendship.

      Well, it clearly isn't about deadlines!

      No, it's about undeadlines!

      I can understand you not bothering to RTFA, but at least you could RTFSubject! Some people... Sheesh!

      --
      Lemon curry???
    4. Re:$_ to that? by ron_ivi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perl 6 ...

      Anyone else miss Perl 3 & 4?

      Personally, I think Perl jumped the shark at Perl5.

      As a better awk/sed/bash, I think I've never seen a tool as good as Perl4. But then Larry decided it had to one-up C++ in some sort of "what's the worst possible way to glom on some confusing fake-OO-wrapper around a language that's main strenght was being not-OO" contest.

  2. sure you want to go with 'undead' ? by mooingyak · · Score: 3, Funny

    It means that the uninfected humans have to shoot it in the head. Or stake it through the heart. And quickly, before things get worse.

    --
    William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    1. Re:sure you want to go with 'undead' ? by narcc · · Score: 4, Funny

      Slashdot reminds me of the townspeople in "The Simpsons" the way the majority opinion changes.

      It wasn't that long ago that Perl was a darling, loved by all, with indecipherable code flowing freely in sigs and comments. Many even seemed to take pride in creating and sharing the most obtuse code imaginable.

      Now it's, apparently, the worst thing ever that no one in their right mind would use for even the most trivial task.

      Oh, Slashdot. When will you build a monorail?

  3. 2005 eh? by jandrese · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't think we're ever going to get as clear of an example of the second system effect as Perl 6. If you asked me back in 2005 if I thought it was going to take more than a decade for the next Perl version bump, I would have said no way. Now I'm wondering if Larry and company shouldn't just ditch Perl 6 and come out with Perl 7, that is basically just Perl 5 with some tweaks to make complex data structures less of a nightmare and better integrate the object model, plus some tweaks around the edges like the implicit /x switch on regular expressions.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
    1. Re:2005 eh? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Funny

      How about "Perl 6 is DNF's retarded cousin?"

  4. "Undead" doesn't mean vibrant, though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Maybe Perl isn't completely "dead", but it sure as fuck isn't as vibrant of a scene as it once was.

    In the 1990s, Perl was THE BIG THING . It was cool. It was trend-setting. It was what let average programmers and sys admins become superheroes, and it let good and great programmers and sysadmins become ABSOLUTE GODS .

    Knowing Perl was what got you jobs. Knowing Perl was what let you get the hard work done fast. Knowing Perl was essential. If you didn't know Perl, you were SHIT IN A URINAL .

    Perl's got some fierce competitors now. Python can do everything Perl can do, but with a way cleaner syntax. Ruby isn't as capable as Perl or Python, but it has a religious aspect to it that makes some hipsters go absolutely batshit crazy for it. Perl just can't compete against them.

    Yeah, Perl isn't dead, and there are a lot of people who still use it today. But let's not kid ourselves, it's not the 1990s. It's not the GLORY DAYS OF PERL , when it ruled the roost.

    1. Re:"Undead" doesn't mean vibrant, though. by mattack2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Python can do everything Perl can do, but with a way cleaner syntax.

      If only I could turn off indentation==scope. I would pay $20 for this ability (to work in every interpreter, not some special one off interpreter just for me).

      Even *with* that limitation (and yes, I know a million people will respond saying it's oh so great and I just don't get it), I still think Python is pretty decent.. Though it seems to have (seemingly) superfluous colons in a few places, which reminds me of Pascal or BASIC.

    2. Re:"Undead" doesn't mean vibrant, though. by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One of the biggest problems with Python is that you can't email people code without it fucking with the formatting.

      Any language design that relies on whitespace as being important is brain-dead.

    3. Re:"Undead" doesn't mean vibrant, though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've never had issues with emailing python code between people within my research group and those outside of it from time to time. Maybe that is because we standardize on using spaces instead of tabs and the email programs don't strip that when sending just text emails. If you are sending something more complex then a dozen lines you could/should just send it as an attachment anyway. Or if you don't keep sensible line lengths, as I've had some email programs of yore insert linebreaks in a bunch of places, and that didn't matter what language you tried emailing if you let the lines get too wide.

  5. Re:Yes, Perl is indeed dead and rotting by cruff · · Score: 4, Informative

    Meanwhile, Perl 5 being phased out of system building / admin tools and web frameworks. Even Perl 5 is dying.

    Not for me, I write new Perl 5 code all the time. Get some real useful work done with it too.

  6. Perl 6ers just can't get shit done. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't think there's a second-system effect going on with Perl 6. Every two or three years some new team has come along and tried to implement it, only to totally fail and produce nothing usable. These people didn't implement Perl 5, so I don't think we can say that Perl 6 is a second attempt for them.

    These Perl 6ers have just continually done stupid shit with half-assed virtual machines and intermediate languages, rather than getting real work done.

    For fuck's sake, just look at the approaches that have always worked in the past:

    - Perl 5 and earlier: An interpreter written in C.

    - Python: An interpreter written in C.

    - Ruby: An interpreter written in C.

    - Lua: An interpreter written in C.

    - Tcl: An interpreter written in C.

    - PHP: An interpreter written in C.

    - UNIX shells: Interpreters written in C.

    The lesson should be crystal-fucking-clear: write an interpreter in C. That's all the Perl 6ers need to do, but for some reason they just won't do it.

    No more Parrot. No more crap written in Haskell. No more stupid intermediate languages. The Perl 6ers just need to cut out the crap, and do things right for a change.

    1. Re:Perl 6ers just can't get shit done. by Beck_Neard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're implying that C-based interpreters are quicker and easier to develop, but that's patently not the case. Just look at the recent huge surge of LLVM-based JIT languages that have been developed extremely rapidly and in high-level languages. C is probably a poor choice now that good alternatives really exist.

      Maybe the problem isn't the choice of language. Maybe the problem is that the designers were incompetent.

      --
      A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
    2. Re:Perl 6ers just can't get shit done. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Writing a virtual machine in C is dead-simple. It's just a loop over a table of opcodes. You can even get fancy and thread your dispatcher (that is, replace your loop conditionals with direct jumps to the next instruction handler), making it nearly as fast as JIT'd code because the CPU can pipeline all your virtual instructions.

      In fact, writing a virtual machine is arguably easier than writing an AST (abstract syntax tree) interpreter (which is what Perl5 is), because it's an elegant abstraction that cleanly separates areas of concern.

      If you can't write a VM in C than you're definitely not an experienced programmer. And if you think using LLVM to write an interpreter is easier, than you're just... I don't even know what... totally out of touch and have no clue how this stuff works.

      The VM isn't the problem. It's all the bells and whistles. The typing and object system. The FFI system. Garbage collection. Perl6 is a complex language, and they tried to bury too much of that complexity at the virtual machine layer. Or at least, they got tangled up in it.

      They couldn't use existing interpreters because at a minimum they wanted sane string prototype with a proper understanding of Unicode, something Java, C# and other systems lack. Perl 6's NFG (normalization form G) is a thing of beauty, but to make it fast you have to put it at a low-level. As for why they got hung up on all the other stuff, I don't know.

      To see what a fast, practical, feature-rich, and state-of-the-art (non-experimental) virtual machine looks like, I would recommend Lua's VM. It's about as simple as you can get and yet remain widely useful. It's completely written in portable, ANSI C (1989), it's several times faster than Perl, Python, Ruby and most other non-JITd interpreters, and the bytecode dispatcher is basically a giant switch statement inside a loop--very easy to read and work backwards through how the typing system works. (It could be made even faster by threading the dispatcher, but to remain concise and performant--without a mess of function pointers-- would require using a non-portable construct like computed gotos. Although the only C compiler I know of which doesn't actually support computed gotos is Visual Studio.)

  7. Re:It should be dead by preaction · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Shall we drag out all the other obfuscated code contests and judge all languages guilty by the most heinous crimes committed with them? Remember that C and C++ give us Windows.

  8. Re:It should be dead by mi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You can write C-code obscurely too. But, somehow, Perl seems to encourage this sort of thing... 20 years ago my CS-professor dismissed Perl as a "write-only" language — since then my conviction of him being right has only grown.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  9. Re:Yes, Perl is indeed dead and rotting by Sez+Zero · · Score: 4, Informative

    Perl 5.20 was just released and "represents approximately 12 months of development since Perl 5.18.0 and contains approximately 470,000 lines of changes across 2,900 files from 124 authors."

    That doesn't seem to bad to me, but I'm not sure how that number of core release authors compares to other languages like Python or Ruby.

  10. Slashdot itself uses Perl by amoeba47 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...squarely blamed Slashdot for starting the "Perl is Dead" meme in 2005...

    Meanwhile, it's apparent that slashdot itself uses Perl e.g: http://slashdot.org/job_board....

  11. Re:Modern Weak Languages by Sez+Zero · · Score: 4, Funny

    What's the difference between a hipster and a Perl hipster?

    A hipster liked it before it was cool and doesn't now. A Perl hipster liked it when it was cool, and still does.

  12. Re:Yes, Perl is indeed dead and rotting by johnkzin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Meanwhile, Perl 5 being phased out of system building / admin tools

    Really? what's replacing it? (genuine question ... I haven't seen anything that really fills that niche as effectively nor as completely)

    Perl 5 is still charging full steam ahead in every sysadmin group I've been around. I know there are python advocates out there, but I have only encountered ONE major IT shop that is completely (or nearly so) python driven (and it happens to be Guido's employer -- hardly a good example). Other than that, the most I've seen is _some_ python but _mostly_ perl in any IT shop.

    Sure, language-geeks have been talking about what other language has done a better job of being "a language" for at least 10 years ... but really, anything you can say negatively about perl can be said about bourne shell programming. And, yet, not only did bourne shell dominate *nix sysadmin and package install programming for 25+ years, but it is _still_ being done out there, by some backward luddite sysadmins. Perl has only been dominant in the sysadmin space for less than 15 years ... I wouldn't be surprised if it lasts at least another 10 more. And, really, since it lacks many of bourne shell programming's problems, it'd be reasonable to expect it to keep going for a lot longer than that. Especially as perl 5's evolution continues to slow down and become more stagnant (creating a consistent and stable programming layer ... which has not been true through the entirety of perl 5's lifespan -- there were a few major hiccups there as various sub-systems were refined or changed).

    (to be clear, perl 5 has _existed_ for more than 15 years, but it didn't become really dominant as a sysadmin language of choice, finally eclipsing bourne shell, until the very late 1990's or early 2000's ... probably about the time that y2k issues wiped out anything too old to have/support perl, and the last of many *nix vendors and most linux distro's being sure they included perl in their boilerplate installation, pretty much removing bourne shell's one major claim to fame (ubiquity).)

  13. Re:Yes, Perl is indeed dead and rotting by mbadolato · · Score: 5, Interesting

    More telling is how utterly fast Perl is compared to the other languages. I've run most of the sample files from this language shootout and had remarkably similar results to what they list there.

    The Perl version performed on par with the C and C versions, and it's growth/memory usage stayed pretty consistent throughout. The other languages were horrid. They took much longer, and their memory usage grew significantly during the run.

    I use Perl still when doing scripting tasks. I love Perl, always have. I don't, however, necessarily think it's the right choice for building a medium to large web-based application any more. Sure the performance is there, and there are some great frameworks like Catalyst and Dancer, but to me, they still feel a bit antiquated to some of the other technologies I've used. Plus installing tons of CPAN modules can get a little trying at times.

  14. Re: obfuscation example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I agree that this (truncated) example is terrible, but it's clearly obfuscation for obfuscation's sake. If you manually insert whitespace and newlines, the above example is easy to read except for a few deliberate obfuscation techniques like hard-to-follow operator chaining and nested assignment.

    Most modern languages allow operator chaining, so things like "$t ^= $c ^= (...) " are not a problem with perl per-se. To make this more readable, all you have to do is decompose it into its component operators, following the rules of operator precedence: "{ $c ^= (...); $t ^= c; }". Most modern languages also allow nested assignment, so things like "if ((@a = ...)[20] & 48)" are allowed. Again, if you want to make it more maintainable, you can write it as: "@a = ...; if (@a[20] & 48)". Once we've removed those types of issues from your example, you're only left with issues related to lack of pretty-printing (includes the fact that nobody but Larry Wall truly understands perl's operator prededence rules), and some surprising things that happen because of implicit variables and dynamic scoping.

    IMHO perl's greatest fault is that there is no round-trip-capable pretty-printer. If Perl shipped with a pretty-printer, and if that pretty printer included an option to explicitly parenthesize operators and insert omitted implicit variables, then people could use the tool to read and understand poorly-written perl-snippets, and the only real fault left would be the fact perl uses dynamic scoping by default.

  15. Meh by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Tool for the job and all that. If I had to maintain some code, I'd prefer perl with "use strict" over any of the newer OO languages. At least when you're looking at bad code, you can usually salvage something from structural code. I've seen some atrocious Ruby programs lately.

    Most of the time you're maintaining code you're maintaining bad code, though, and it's pretty rare that I run across a perl program with "use strict" turned on. But if I don't see it, I at least know what I'm up against. The newer languages need a similar "A bad programmer wrote this" flags.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  16. Proof (with silly statistics) ... by rduke15 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Is it dead? Well, some quick scripting can tell us the truth, using Bash and of course Perl.

    On my Ubuntu notebook and main machine:

    sudo find /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin /usr/sbin -type f -executable -exec file -b "{}" \; \
    | perl -MData::Dumper -nle '
            next unless /script/;
            if ( /(shell|python|ruby|perl|bash)/i ) {
                $types{$1}++
            }
            else {
                warn "Other: $_\n"
            };
            END {
                print Dumper(\%types);
            }'

    Output:

    Other: a /usr/bin/make -f script, ASCII text executable
    Other: a nickle script, UTF-8 Unicode text executable
    Other: awk script, ASCII text executable
    $VAR1 = {
                        'perl' => 283,
                        'python' => 104,
                        'bash' => 1,
                        'Ruby' => 3,
                        'ruby' => 9,
                        'shell' => 602
                    };

    On a server:

    Other: a /bin/dash script, ASCII text executable
    $VAR1 = {
                        'Python' => 36,
                        'Perl' => 139,
                        'shell' => 267
                    };

    Looks very much alive. Unless of course, Perl realized what it was calculating and cheated and made it's own numbers up on the fly...

  17. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  18. There's nothing wrong with Perl ... by nut · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... it's just the way people use it.

    Perl was designed as a powerful, flexible, loosely typed scripting language for munging text files and streams, and that's exactly what it is.

    It's great for those scripts that you write for a particular task and never use again after the few days it was necessary. It's also good for writing glue code on occasion, to tie the inputs and outputs of other applications together, and when shell scripting just won't quite cut it.

    The trouble was that it was such a useful scripting language people started writing applications in it. Then they had to jump on the object-oriented bandwagon, which was done clumsily. Sort of like gluing a dog to your horse so it can fetch. And yes, it can be difficult to read, but it doesn't have to be.

    Use Perl for the tasks it was originally designed for. If you're going to write real applications, use a more appropriate language. Don't kick your dog because he can't sing.

    --
    Never trust a man in a blue trench coat, Never drive a car when you're dead
  19. Perl isn't (un)dead: worse, it's moribund. by Slartibartfast · · Score: 3, Insightful

    All traction was lost when Perl 6 became some amorphous goal, and nobody gives a damn any more. Personally, I think this is a shame -- but I've found Python and Ruby to be more-than-acceptable replacements. (Honestly, I think Ruby is the cat's pajamas, aside from regex speed on 100+ MB logfiles.)

    So... does Perl wish to make a comeback? It really would be fairly easy:
    1) Have Larry Wall take the reins well-and-truly again.
    2) Give a timeframe for a for-real reference release of Perl 6. Not this sort of wish-wash "everything that says it's Perl 6 *is* Perl 6" thing. Choose *one* of the projects, and have it be the reference against which all others are measured.
    3) Give direction and make it public. While associated clearly with #1, merely taking the reins won't do the job -- it has to be clear that Perl is *GOING* somewhere, and not just stagnating. And this has to be made known.

    There are plenty of sysadmins who learned Perl when it was 5.x, and who have fond memories of it. Give them something more than memories to work with, and you may well go somewhere. As it is? I just couldn't be bothered to care. Gimme Ruby.

  20. Re:It should be dead by jbolden · · Score: 3

    Perl remember originated with short system automation scripts a replacement for Sed and AWK. It wasn't uncommon for a Perl script to be one line

    perl -e... in a shell script.
    And then of course a replacement for shell scripting. Perl handled 20 line programs wonderfully. But what works well at 20 lines doesn't work so well at 2000 lines. Perl took on new problem domains.

  21. What is "Dead" by bradgoodman · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Sure - it's way down on the TIOBE index, and Perl 6 has been in production longer than Duke Nukem Forever, and there is a ton of "legacy" code that is written in Perl, so why do we say it's "dead"?

    Because of the lack of new projects being done with it. I can't remember the last time a [major] web site or web framework was done in Perl. It seems like the whole "ruby on rails" fad is over, but even things like Django (Python), .NET, Java, PHP, and even stuff like "Go" have stolen Perl's Thunder on the Web front.

    Well what about as your standard workhorse for script kiddies? Seems like Python has cleaned Perl's clock. For me - I've been a die-hard Perl guy for 10 years. The past couple years, I've worked with many different technologies such as 2d/3d CAD projects, Blender (3d adnimation), Inkscape (2d illustration), GNU Radio, OpenStack (cloud), and even Amazon AWS [libraries]. You know what was the striking commonality to all of these? They were done in Python.

    Tiny exception was in the last case (above - Amazon AWS libraries) had several different language options but had *NO* Perl options whatsoever. So the language that was once so revolutionary because of the abundance of CPAN libraries available for it starts to not have newer libraries built/ported to it. Furthermore, binding stuff to Perl can be difficult. So much so that most modern distros will make their own "Perl library" [RPMs] - and one of the reasons being is that a standard CPAN module installation won't work due to problems linking/binding/building across all these different environments with very different prerequisites. Most third party Python stuff I have acquired is most often "native python", and works across all types of exotic platforms - even on iOS and Google App Engine.

    As for me - I had to switch away from my beloved Perl over to Python for the aforementioned reasons. There are still several things I miss very much - the abilities to so easily spawn and fork "helper" processes, the ease it which it integrates regular expressions, how it can manipulate files, etc. All these things *can* be done with Python, they're just integrated into Perl much better IMHO.

    It seems like Perl 6 was supposed to use something similar to Java's "JVM" microcode interpreter. This could have been a possibility to run Perl in embedded sandbox-type environments (like parking meters and smartphones), but it never happened.

    So, I do believe Perl is dead. I miss it for what it was, what it is, and what might have been!

  22. Re:It should be dead by dargaud · · Score: 3, Informative
    Absolutely. I wrote in Perl for a year. I gave up when I figured out I couldn't understand pieces of code I'd written a month prior.

    And another issue for me was this whole There's More Than One Way To Do It philosophy which I find extremely frustrating. Write a piece of code in 20 lines and show it on usenet. Somebody writes it in 10. Then another one pipes up in 3. Then the true Guru comes up with a one-liner that nobody can grok. And they all run faster. Maybe.

    It also mean that when you read somebody else's code, you have to pattern that you can recognize. In C if I have to go through an array, you can bet there's gonna be a loop. In Perl, mystery, it could be any of multiple and rarely used constructs. The thing that made Perl popular at once was the integration of regular expressions, but we now have this in Bash =~, so why bother ?!?

    --
    Non-Linux Penguins ?
  23. Re:Yes, Perl is indeed dead and rotting by discord5 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I moderated in this article, but this is something that I'd like to talk about for a bit, even if only anecdotal...

    Perl 5 is still charging full steam ahead in every sysadmin group I've been around. I know there are python advocates out there, but I have only encountered ONE major IT shop that is completely (or nearly so) python driven (and it happens to be Guido's employer -- hardly a good example)

    Over the past 8 years my own usage of Perl in writing code has declined to zero. There has been a mentality change over the years in the shop I work in, and where we used to grab for Perl by default as a quick'n'dirty duct-tape & MacGuyver language, we now exclusively rely on Python. I think there are several reasons for this shift.

    The most prominent one to me personally is that other languages have adopted CPAN-like repositories. I don't know about the statistics of numbers of modules, active development, number of commits, etc etc, and put bluntly I really don't care. Although these statistics are interesting into disseminating how active a language is to its developers, to me as a user of the language it only matters if a module is maintained and does what its supposed to do. The thing is, for most of the things I used to use Perl modules for, I now use Python modules, and can say "Well, it's good enough".

    Our development teams composition has also changed. A lot of our older generation of programmers/admins have retired or switched jobs, and a lot of younger people were hired to replace them. The younger generation is definitely more familiar with Python, Ruby and other scripting languages than it is with Perl. The incentive for learning Perl has become a lot smaller. Perl was the de facto language for many when writing a CGI script, but then RoR and AJAX happened. While over time Perl adapted (think Catalyst and Dancer) other languages have adapted as well. Look at all the wsgi applications and frameworks in Python.

    Our investment in Perl itself was more of the kind where we used a set of scripts to change data from format A to B at which point our Java and/or C++ code takes over, or some tools to deal with our logs, etc. The switch to Python for these tools was gradual (but quick) process, and we found ourselves not looking back. I can't really say that we were/are heavily invested in Perl or Python, but for day to day usage Python has completely taken over. Who knows where we end up in another 8 years from now?

    Lastly, if you were to go around our shop, asking people what's new about Python 3 you'll get pretty much right answers. If you go around our shop asking people what's happening with Perl 6, you will get a blank stare. I remember clearly how Perl 6 was going to become the best thing since butter on toast, ... There was general excitement about it all, and then there was a whole load of ... well... nothing. We're 11-12 years further and there's still no sign of Perl 6. What the hell happened there?

    Perl has only been dominant in the sysadmin space for less than 15 years ... I wouldn't be surprised if it lasts at least another 10 more.

    I don't doubt that Perl will be around for a whole lot longer. It has assembled a group of dedicated die-hard users and developers over the years, and in general it has a great community. There are older, more horrible languages that are still alive today, so I doubt Perl will be gone anytime soon.

    However, while my entire post is anecdotal, I do think the Perl community is deluding itself a bit. The talk in the video (I actually listened to it in the background while working on something) mentions a lot of statistics that are interesting to the Perl developers and maintainers, but are hardly and indicator of usage or adoption. The more interesting part of the statistical talk was about the general decline of jobs available for scripting languages in favor of newer technologies, but even those statistics in general don't speak much about usage and adoption.

    FWIW, may Perl be around a long long time. Having more tools at your disposal is never a bad thing.