Re:Little Point Learning Perl If Not Already Learn
on
Learning Perl, 4th Ed.
·
· Score: 1
From what I've been hearing from hiring managers, the jobs for Perl are largely going unfilled, because since the dot-bomb, many good Perl hackers jumped ship early and are now underemployed in crappy other-language jobs.
So, learning Perl today may actually increase your job potential. New startups are happening all the time, including projects that are shifting away from Java and dot-net, and toward real workable open-source solutions.
We pitched this book to O'Reilly as "the last edition before Perl6 comes out". So, that's the scoop. One last chance to get Learning Perl for Perl5 correct. And apparently, we did the job.
All I want to do is receive mail and send it to 3 users on my machine, and have them be able to send mail via TB to the server without it become a spam relay. Why is this so damn hard.
Because spammers (read: "the people who shameless use the resources of innocent third parties to shove unwanted advertising down our throat") are getting more clever about finding open relays.
Yes it sucks, but yes, the moment you're on the net you have to play like the big boys and do everything right.
So is middle management willing to pay extra tax so that recent graduates who would have otherwise taken entry-level positions can go on welfare instead?
It is not the job of any society to make up for the fact that you chose to be educated in the wrong profession. It's your mistake. You suffer.
Re:no perl scripts should forget...
on
Perl Medic
·
· Score: 1
So, you gave up grep and map? How sad.
After all, you can't use them without $_.
And defaulting regex to $_ is a very natural thing to do.
I think a rule like this is like saying "Don't shift the car out of first gear! Higher gears kill!". That's not responsible. The responsible thing to do is to create guidelines for clarity. Banishing $_ is not one of them in any sane Perl shop.
I'll disagree. OSX is everything that I want from a BSD-style Unix under the hood. And it has some nice Desktop-ish features above that (Aqua, Quicktime, Finder, etc).
But it has process IDs, and it creates new processes with "fork", and "ls" seems to work, and filenames can be any character (except for the HFS+ case-folding), so all of the things I know from my two-decades of Unix exposure just work.
I'm not sure why you would say it's "not Unix". Sure, it's "not Linux". But Linux isn't Unix either. Or it is. I think if you can call Linux "Unix", you can certainly call OSX "Unix". Same principle, different creators.
I remember when I got my FAA review for my private. The inspector asked "what docs do you need?" and I said "ARROW...", and he said "OK, that's enough... you said ARROW". {grin}
It apparently is different in Canada. I'm using the terminology of the FAA (USA), which is the only terminology that matters to me, or to the original thread.
My CGI::Prototype application framework started as an IT task for a large university I have as a client.
The strategy I used was to explain to the IT group to which I was contracted that I was leveraging from a lot of existing open source, and that the "tradition" was to return something in kind for using this software. The portions related to the generic application were thus released, while the portion I do to solve the specific problem that drove this framework remain private to the client. This is the best of both worlds.
I realize that the GIMP is free, and all that, and that Photoshop is evil because it comes as a locked-up restricted binary...
But having said that, The Gimp is great if you need only the features of Photoshop 4 or 5. Photoshop has come a long way since then. Anyone who compares the two as "comparable" has not spent more than a few hours with the latest releases of Photoshop. There are definitely some cool things about process and detailed editing that The Gimp doesn't even come close for.
And I suspect this will continue to be the case. I'm willing to pay $800 to get today's tools, even though tools from five years ago are available for free.
The Perl6 "rule" system is amazing. You can spell out a grammar in a nice, easy-to-comment BNF-like style, and then you end up with a nice AST of your input string. Then subclass it, and get a grammar variant. All built on top of "newer" regular expressions that begin to make more sense, and again encourage whitespace and commenting.
In fact, Perl6 itself will be parsed using this grammar mechanism, with the active grammar being tweakable by the code as it is compiled. Self-modifying grammars instead of pre-processors or source filters! But "with great power, comes great responsibility".
I've had these sorts of ads for about six months. Frankly, they're completely avoidable, since the "thumbs up" icon just pops in to the upper right corner of the screen during an ad (that I'm skimming over anyway).
In fact (imagine this), I've even been curious enough to go ahead and follow the link! That's never been the case with ads on websites. The few I've seen have been cool ads, and because "it's tivo(tm)", I can also pause and rewind the ads. Nice.
So, for you doomsayers... this is not the beginning of the end. This is a nice compromise. It doesn't affect the real content, and it's completely optional and unintrusive.
Yup, regular expressions are not capable of a full-range of computing
That's the "classic" regular expressions, not the modern regular expressions accepted by PCRE, and Perl itself. In fact, Perl regular expressions are full Turing machines, with PCRE being a few steps behind that. So PCRE isn't really PCRE... it's P-likeCRE. {grin}
There are messy desk people, and clean desk people. If you force someone who normally works with a messy desk to have a clean desk, their productivity goes down. Likewise in reverse.
Similarly, there are Perl people, and there are Python people. One is not better than the other. It just matters on a manner of fitting.
Please stop with the "one is better than the other" stuff. Better for you perhaps.
I'm still suffering from that, in a sense. It did a big dent in my net assets, as well as make it harder for me to work. There are still countries that won't let me enter, although it's not a US restriction on my travel any more. There are also people that cannot (by company policy) hire a felon, so I'm ruled out there too.
But, I've tried to make the most lemonade from the lemons I've been given.
Thank you for that. Stupid, yes. Forgot to tell my boss everything I was working on, yes. Perhaps a bit self-serving, looking for unrequested things that'd be "good for the company" so that I'd get hired longer and more often, yes.
I've actually said your exact point a number of times. In fact, I didn't "invent" anything. I was solving someone's problem, who had posed the problem in the Perl newsgroup, using the knowledge I had at hand. As I'm also a LISP hacker (see my "pretty printer" in the GNU Emacs distribution), I simply relied on my knowledge of simple list manipulation techniques to transform the problem into something workable.
I had no idea it would take on a life of its own as a standard idiom. And it was not originally "for a column". It was a usenet posting and wasn't presented as anything remarkable.
I've made a successful company out of Perl training, writing, and consulting. I've even contributed some of my profits back into the Perl community, through the Perl Foundation and its predecessors (one of whom I created with my own money).
And I've convinced some of my clients that the code I write for them for hire belongs in the CPAN, and that the magazine articles I write for them for hire belongs on the web for free.
It's all a matter of what you negotiate, and finding out what's needed and wanted and doing it. You don't need to charge for the software itself if you can figure out what else they'll need to make the best use of the software.
Comcast "On Demand" is nothing at all like a TiVo. Anyone who can compare the two in the same sentence has not played with both. And shame on the cable companies for trying to position it as the same.
The menus of "On Demand" are hard to navigate. And once you start playing a program, you end up back at the top menu again, not where you were, near other similar programs. You can't search. You can't skip forward into a program faster than 3x or so. It's just plain slow and ugly. And you can't view or save arbitrary content (like every episode of SG-1): you get only what they want you to get "on demand".
I see on-demand as a (poor) complement to TiVo, but definitely not a replacement.
Slashdot Mirror
I encourage you to review every article I've written there, and come to your own conclusion. I'll stand by my public record.
So, learning Perl today may actually increase your job potential. New startups are happening all the time, including projects that are shifting away from Java and dot-net, and toward real workable open-source solutions.
Camel 4ed will likely come out after Perl6. So Camel 3ed is likely the last Perl5 edition.
We pitched this book to O'Reilly as "the last edition before Perl6 comes out". So, that's the scoop. One last chance to get Learning Perl for Perl5 correct. And apparently, we did the job.
Yes it sucks, but yes, the moment you're on the net you have to play like the big boys and do everything right.
First ever!!!?? Sheesh.
After all, you can't use them without $_.
And defaulting regex to $_ is a very natural thing to do.
I think a rule like this is like saying "Don't shift the car out of first gear! Higher gears kill!". That's not responsible. The responsible thing to do is to create guidelines for clarity. Banishing $_ is not one of them in any sane Perl shop.
But it has process IDs, and it creates new processes with "fork", and "ls" seems to work, and filenames can be any character (except for the HFS+ case-folding), so all of the things I know from my two-decades of Unix exposure just work.
I'm not sure why you would say it's "not Unix". Sure, it's "not Linux". But Linux isn't Unix either. Or it is. I think if you can call Linux "Unix", you can certainly call OSX "Unix". Same principle, different creators.
I remember when I got my FAA review for my private. The inspector asked "what docs do you need?" and I said "ARROW ...", and he said "OK, that's enough... you said ARROW". {grin}
It apparently is different in Canada. I'm using the terminology of the FAA (USA), which is the only terminology that matters to me, or to the original thread.
And then you say "let it lapse". Your certificate is good for a lifetime, unless they take it away from you. No expiration date.
Maybe what you meant is "let your currency lapse", by not taking the required AFR/BFR, and/or not getting a new medical certificate.
Yeah, you probably meant all this, but as a PP-ASEL-IA with 270 hours, I can't let the terminology be that sloppy. {grin}
The strategy I used was to explain to the IT group to which I was contracted that I was leveraging from a lot of existing open source, and that the "tradition" was to return something in kind for using this software. The portions related to the generic application were thus released, while the portion I do to solve the specific problem that drove this framework remain private to the client. This is the best of both worlds.
But having said that, The Gimp is great if you need only the features of Photoshop 4 or 5. Photoshop has come a long way since then. Anyone who compares the two as "comparable" has not spent more than a few hours with the latest releases of Photoshop. There are definitely some cool things about process and detailed editing that The Gimp doesn't even come close for.
And I suspect this will continue to be the case. I'm willing to pay $800 to get today's tools, even though tools from five years ago are available for free.
In fact, Perl6 itself will be parsed using this grammar mechanism, with the active grammar being tweakable by the code as it is compiled. Self-modifying grammars instead of pre-processors or source filters! But "with great power, comes great responsibility".
In fact (imagine this), I've even been curious enough to go ahead and follow the link! That's never been the case with ads on websites. The few I've seen have been cool ads, and because "it's tivo(tm)", I can also pause and rewind the ads. Nice.
So, for you doomsayers... this is not the beginning of the end. This is a nice compromise. It doesn't affect the real content, and it's completely optional and unintrusive.
Bravo, TiVo.
Similarly, there are Perl people, and there are Python people. One is not better than the other. It just matters on a manner of fitting.
Please stop with the "one is better than the other" stuff. Better for you perhaps.
I'm still suffering from that, in a sense. It did a big dent in my net assets, as well as make it harder for me to work. There are still countries that won't let me enter, although it's not a US restriction on my travel any more. There are also people that cannot (by company policy) hire a felon, so I'm ruled out there too.
But, I've tried to make the most lemonade from the lemons I've been given.
But intending harm, no.
"No harm, no foul."
False quote. Wheee.
I had no idea it would take on a life of its own as a standard idiom. And it was not originally "for a column". It was a usenet posting and wasn't presented as anything remarkable.
Just trying to set the record straight.
And I've convinced some of my clients that the code I write for them for hire belongs in the CPAN, and that the magazine articles I write for them for hire belongs on the web for free.
It's all a matter of what you negotiate, and finding out what's needed and wanted and doing it. You don't need to charge for the software itself if you can figure out what else they'll need to make the best use of the software.
The menus of "On Demand" are hard to navigate. And once you start playing a program, you end up back at the top menu again, not where you were, near other similar programs. You can't search. You can't skip forward into a program faster than 3x or so. It's just plain slow and ugly. And you can't view or save arbitrary content (like every episode of SG-1): you get only what they want you to get "on demand".
I see on-demand as a (poor) complement to TiVo, but definitely not a replacement.