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 $ [at] % 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?

>>>>> "j" == jm <jm [at] nospam.fr> writes:

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 $ [at] % 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

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri [at] stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com --
----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------
--------- Free Perl Training --- http://perlhunter.com/college.html ---------
--------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com ---------

jm schreef:

> perl [...] is poorly typed

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

--
Affijn, Ruud

"Gewoon is een tijger."

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? Does it make
you feel special? Perl is great, but I've always thought some of it's
backers (at least in this group) could use a dose of reality and stop
behaving like such self-important elitists and come back down to Earth.
This BS just keeps on repeating and it serves no one any good
whatsoever.

"V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:
> 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.

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.

xhoster [at] gmail.com wrote:
> "V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:
>> 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.

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

>>>>> "VR" == V Ronans <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> writes:

VR> xhoster [at] gmail.com wrote:
>> "V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:
>>> 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

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri [at] stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com --
----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------
--------- Free Perl Training --- http://perlhunter.com/college.html ---------
--------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com ---------

"V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:

> 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,

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.

--
John

http://johnbokma.com/perl/

"V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:


> 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.

--
John

http://johnbokma.com/perl/

Uri Guttman wrote:
>>>>>> "VR" == V Ronans <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> writes:
>
>> xhoster [at] gmail.com wrote:
> >> "V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:
> >>> 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.
>
>> Yes, when _programming_, not with geenral petty conversations, such
>> responses as "it's Perl not perl or PERL" serve NO PURPOSE. Arguably
>> neither does this leg of the thread, but that because people like you
>> refuse to pull out your heads for some fresh air.
>
> you don't seem to be a regular here

I'm a regular reader.

> and misspelling perl is a common thing among

1) It wasn't misspelled in this case, be maybe mis-cased.

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

> 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.

Actually it is also 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".



http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?Acronym=perl&strin g=exact

"Practical Extraction and Report Language"


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


> 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.

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

John Bokma wrote:
> "V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:
>
>> 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,
>
> 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.Etly

John Bokma wrote:
> "V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:
>
>
>> 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.

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.

--
G.Etly

"V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:

> 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

--
John

http://johnbokma.com/perl/

>>>>> "VR" == V Ronans <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> writes:

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!!!

>> 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.

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&strin g=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.


>> 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.

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

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri [at] stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com --
----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------
--------- Free Perl Training --- http://perlhunter.com/college.html ---------
--------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com ---------

>>>>> "GE" == Gordon Etly <get [at] bentsys.com> writes:

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

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri [at] stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com --
----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------
--------- Free Perl Training --- http://perlhunter.com/college.html ---------
--------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com ---------

>>>>> "GE" == Gordon Etly <get [at] bentsys.com> writes:

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.

>> 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.

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

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri [at] stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com --
----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------
--------- Free Perl Training --- http://perlhunter.com/college.html ---------
--------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com ---------

In article <x7abk7lft6.fsf [at] mail.sysarch.com>,
Uri Guttman <uri [at] stemsystems.com> wrote:
> 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.

As long as the man page continues to call it "Practical Extraction and
Report Language", and "Programming Perl" says it is the "Practical
Extraction and Report Language", it *is* going to be called PERL now and
then, regardless of whether that is an acronym or a backronym.

--
--Tim Smith

In article <x7iqyvn342.fsf [at] mail.sysarch.com>,
Uri Guttman <uri [at] stemsystems.com> wrote:
> >>>>> perl [...] is poorly typed
> >>>>
> >>>> By you? (Did you mean Perl by the way?)
....
> 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.

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"!?

--
--Tim Smith

On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 21:17:52 -0700, Gordon Etly <get [at] bentsys.com> wrote:

[...]

> 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.

[...]

> 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.
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.

Tim Smith wrote:
> 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

On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 03:32:19 +0000, John Bokma wrote:

> 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?

"Gordon Etly" <get [at] bentsys.com> wrote in
news:65r17iF2h5fbhU1 [at] mid.individual.net:

> 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 <1usa [at] llenroc.ude.invalid>
(remove .invalid and reverse each component for email address)

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

"David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)" <dformosa [at] usyd.edu.au> wrote in
news:slrnfvh94l.b50.dformosa [at] localhost.localdomain:

> 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.

;-)

--
A. Sinan Unur <1usa [at] llenroc.ude.invalid>
(remove .invalid and reverse each component for email address)

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

Uri Guttman wrote:
> 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

David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 21:17:52 -0700, Gordon Etly <get [at] bentsys.com>
> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > 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.Etly

On 2008-04-06, V.Ronans <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:
> xhoster [at] gmail.com wrote:
>> "V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:
>>> 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.
>
> Yes, when _programming_, not with geenral petty conversations, such
> responses as "it's Perl not perl or PERL" serve NO PURPOSE. Arguably
> neither does this leg of the thread, but that because people like you
> refuse to pull out your heads for some fresh air.
>
In my experience, people who cannot speak precisely cannot program precisely.
They pick up bad habits.

--
Christopher Mattern

NOTICE
Thank you for noticing this new notice
Your noticing it has been noted
And will be reported to the authorities

A. Sinan Unur wrote:
> "Gordon Etly" <get [at] bentsys.com> wrote in
> news:65r17iF2h5fbhU1 [at] mid.individual.net:
>
>> 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.

--
G.Etly

Gordon Etly wrote:
> David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) wrote:
>> On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 21:17:52 -0700, Gordon Etly <get [at] bentsys.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> 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

Should be: "But it's a rather poor indicator. What if someone"

> 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.Etly

Chris Mattern wrote:
> On 2008-04-06, V.Ronans <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:
>> xhoster [at] gmail.com wrote:
>>> "V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>
>> Yes, when _programming_, not with geenral petty conversations, such
>> responses as "it's Perl not perl or PERL" serve NO PURPOSE. Arguably
>> neither does this leg of the thread, but that because people like you
>> refuse to pull out your heads for some fresh air.
>>
> In my experience, people who cannot speak precisely cannot program
> precisely. They pick up bad habits.

And just how does one distinguish between "perl", "Perl", and "PERL"
when //speaking// ?

Go type 'perldoc perl' and you will see that any of those forms is
perfectly valid. Are you saying one cannot be considered "precise" by
going according to Perl's own documentation?!? Does this group's FAQ, as
valuable as it may be, hold more weight then Perl's own docs/man-page?

--
G.Etly

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------000003050207080203000107
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Uri Guttman wrote:
> _t_hat is very wrong. _s_ee my other post about this. _p_erl was never
> originally an acronym and you can ask _l_arry. _h_mm, maybe _i_ should
> the next time _i_ have dinner with him.
Hmmm... You either have no regard for proper capitalization of the
English language, lack a shift key or are just plain lazy. The above
underlined letters tell you all you need to know...
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
Question: Why do people always seem to find things in the last place
that they look? Answer: Because most people stop looking after they find
it!

--------------000003050207080203000107
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Uri Guttman wrote:
<blockquote id="mid_x7abk7lft6_fsf_mail_sysarch_com"
cite="mid:x7abk7lft6.fsf [at] mail.sysarch.com" type="cite"><u>t</u>hat is
very wrong. <u>s</u>ee my other post about this. <u>p</u>erl was
never originally an acronym and you can ask <u>l</u>arry. <u>h</u>mm,
maybe <u>i</u> should the next time <u>i</u> have dinner with him. <br>
</blockquote>
Hmmm... You either have no regard for proper capitalization of the
English language, lack a shift key or are just plain lazy. The above
underlined letters tell you all you need to know...<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Andrew DeFaria<br>
<small><font color="#999999">Question: Why do people always seem to
find things in the last place that they look? Answer: Because most
people stop looking after they find it!</font></small>
</div>
</body>
</html>

--------------000003050207080203000107--

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------020204000709030801040709
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Uri Guttman wrote:
>>>>>> "VR" == V Ronans <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> writes:
>
> VR> Uri Guttman wrote:
>
> VR> I'm a regular reader.
>
> not a regular contributor. that downgrades your comments here. by a lot.
You did not request that he be a regular contributor - just a regular.
Shall we now condemn him for *your *ambiguity?
> 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!!!
Ah, moron, did you not understand his point? It wasn't really that
difficult to comprehend. Stop being obtuse!
> 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.
So let me get this straight... You *choose* to be a pompous little prick
and consciously want to lowercase everything even though you know it's
wrong to what? Attract more nerdy friends?!? Great job there ace!
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
Old dog still learning - please don't shoot yet

--------------020204000709030801040709
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Uri Guttman wrote:
<blockquote id="mid_x7iqyvlg2w_fsf_mail_sysarch_com"
cite="mid:x7iqyvlg2w.fsf [at] mail.sysarch.com" type="cite">
<blockquote id="StationeryCiteGenerated_1" type="cite">
<blockquote id="StationeryCiteGenerated_2" type="cite">
<blockquote id="StationeryCiteGenerated_3" type="cite">
<blockquote id="StationeryCiteGenerated_4" type="cite">
<blockquote id="StationeryCiteGenerated_5" type="cite">"VR"
== V Ronans <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:v_r [at] spamless.and.happy"><v_r [at] spamless.and.happy></a> writes:<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<!----><br>
VR> Uri Guttman wrote:<br>
<br>
VR> I'm a regular reader.<br>
<br>
not a regular contributor. that downgrades your comments here. by a lot.<br>
</blockquote>
You did not request that he be a regular contributor - just a regular.
Shall we now condemn him for <b>your </b>ambiguity?<br>
<blockquote id="mid_x7iqyvlg2w_fsf_mail_sysarch_com"
cite="mid:x7iqyvlg2w.fsf [at] mail.sysarch.com" type="cite"> VR> 2) I'm
not sure you should be preaching about using proper grammar when <br>
VR> you don't even bother to capitalize the first letter of your
sentences.<br>
<br>
WELL I CAN HIT THE SHIFT KEY IF YOU WANT!!!<br>
</blockquote>
Ah, moron, did you not understand his point? It wasn't really that
difficult to comprehend. Stop being obtuse!<br>
<blockquote id="mid_x7iqyvlg2w_fsf_mail_sysarch_com"
cite="mid:x7iqyvlg2w.fsf [at] mail.sysarch.com" type="cite">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.<br>
</blockquote>
So let me get this straight... You <b>choose</b> to be a pompous
little prick and consciously want to lowercase everything even though
you know it's wrong to what? Attract more nerdy friends?!? Great job
there ace!<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Andrew DeFaria<br>
<small><font color="#999999">Old dog still learning - please don't
shoot yet</font></small>
</div>
</body>
</html>

--------------020204000709030801040709--

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------060208010202030109070208
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Uri Guttman wrote:
> 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.
You work in the "job placement field"?!? What are you a recruiter?

Total bull! You have people coming in here asking questions about how
perl "throws" a message to the "monitor"! Being technically accurate
will never, I repeat - NEVER be something you'll see a beginner be
proficient at! *Saying* "perl" or "PERL" means nothing - they *sound*
the same. They are typed differently. And quite frankly the case is
totally unimportant compared to teaching noobies the difference between
"throwing" a message on a "monitor" and actually printing to stdout.

You're argument is vacuous and your stance is nothing more than
argumentative.
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
Backups? Backups? We don't need no stinking backups!

--------------060208010202030109070208
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Uri Guttman wrote:<br>
<blockquote id="mid_x7ej9jlfx0_fsf_mail_sysarch_com"
cite="mid:x7ej9jlfx0.fsf [at] mail.sysarch.com" type="cite">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.<br>
</blockquote>
You work in the "job placement field"?!? What are you a recruiter?<br>
<br>
Total bull! You have people coming in here asking questions about how
perl "throws" a message to the "monitor"! Being technically accurate
will never, I repeat - NEVER be something you'll see a beginner be
proficient at! <b>Saying</b> "perl" or "PERL" means nothing - they <b>sound</b>
the same. They are typed differently. And quite frankly the case is
totally unimportant compared to teaching noobies the difference between
"throwing" a message on a "monitor" and actually printing to stdout.<br>
<br>
You're argument is vacuous and your stance is nothing more than
argumentative.<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Andrew DeFaria<br>
<small><font color="#999999">Backups? Backups? We don't need no
stinking backups!</font></small>
</div>
</body>
</html>

--------------060208010202030109070208--

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------050909000004030305080007
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Gordon Etly wrote:
>> But it's a rather indicator. What is someone wants to be a little
> Should be: "But it's a rather poor indicator. What if someone"
>> This alone should make seeing "PERL" not surprising, weather one has
>> read the FAQ or not.
Since we're in correcting mode... This should be 'This alone should make
seeing "PERL" not surprising, _whether_ one has read the FAQ or not.' ;-)
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? then he is malevolent. Is he both able and
willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then
why call him God?

--------------050909000004030305080007
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Gordon Etly wrote:
<blockquote id="mid_65sd0dF2fe733U1_mid_individual_net"
cite="mid:65sd0dF2fe733U1 [at] mid.individual.net" type="cite">
<blockquote id="StationeryCiteGenerated_1" type="cite">But it's a
rather indicator. What is someone wants to be a little<br>
</blockquote>
<!---->Should be: "But it's a rather poor indicator. What if someone"<br>
<blockquote id="StationeryCiteGenerated_4" type="cite">This alone
should make seeing "PERL" not surprising, weather one has read the FAQ
or not. </blockquote>
</blockquote>
Since we're in correcting mode... This should be 'This alone should
make seeing "PERL" not surprising, <u>whether</u> one has read the FAQ
or not.' <span class="moz-smiley-s3"><span> ;-) </span></span><br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Andrew DeFaria<br>
<small><font color="#999999">Is God willing to prevent evil, but not
able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? then he
is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is
he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?</font></small>
</div>
</body>
</html>

--------------050909000004030305080007--

"Gordon Etly" <get [at] bentsys.com> wrote:

> John Bokma wrote:
>> "V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:
>>
>>> 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,
>>
>> 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.

I am sure that in a Java related group people will post remarks if
someone mixes up javac with java (executables).

Also, I am sure that in C related groups people start to ask questions
if you constantly talk about x is an integer and that you have problems
with it.

> Second, why is it people like yourself
> can never give a straight answer as to why it is of such high
> importance?

Because programming is about being very specific and exact. Details do
matter. Calling a warning and error is another classic one (or vice
versa), or just stating that "my PERL program crashed, please help".

> 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?

IMO a good Perl programmer knows the difference between Perl and perl,
and knows when to use which one.

> I mean you have people like Abigail who use their own
> quote characters, Uri who can't use a bloody shift key, etc,

Yes, and me, who has English as a second language. As long as all those
people don't write ambiguous statements related with the problem/answer,
I don't have a problem with it.

> and you're
> worried about how some random bloke cases the word/term Perl?

Yes. Look at the subject: perl should be improved. I read that as: the
perl executable should be improved. I have very little to say on that
subject (I am not a perl programmer/hacker)

However, if the subject is: Perl should be improved, I might like to
read it, because, as a Perl programmer, I have my own ideas.

--
John

http://johnbokma.com/perl/

Johann Kappacher <Johann.Kappacher [at] chello.at> wrote:

>> 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".


Uri avoids the shift key for one reason or another. Regs here don't
mistake Uri for a newbie, and hence read over this.

The problem with people who use PERL, or perl if they mean Perl, and vice
versa, often are newbies. They increase their change of being taken
serious by getting it right. Or they might be able to get away with it, if
other regs recognize them as someone who knows their Perl :-D.

--
John

http://johnbokma.com/perl/

Andrew DeFaria <Andrew [at] DeFaria.com> wrote:

> Attachment decoded: text-html-3

Oops, you just lost any credebility :-D

--
John

http://johnbokma.com/perl/

"Gordon Etly" <get [at] bentsys.com> wrote:

> John Bokma wrote:
>> "V.Ronans" <v_r [at] spamless.and.happy> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> 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.
>
> There is no real difference.

Yes there is. I can be hired as a Perl programmer, but if you are
looking for a perl programmer, I have to turn your project down.

> 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".

Who do you trust more? People who make a living working with Perl on a
daily basis, who have contributed to the language in one way or another,
or some dictionary entry?

>> 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.

Based on my experience of quite some years: *anyone* I have seen
constantly refering to Perl as PERL had either never programmed a single
line in Perl, or was an absolute newbie.

> 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,

Yes, used to annoy me as well. But the alternate quoting has nothing to
do with Perl or perl (heh, or a lot ;-) ), and the value of the content
of *his* [1] posts severely outweights the quoting.

> Uri for his inability to use the shift key, and so
> forth),

Yeah, those people who have English as their second lenguage :-D.

> to judge some random bloke who may also choose to be different.

If his piece was well written, nobody would have made a point of his
misspelling of Perl.

--
John

http://johnbokma.com/perl/

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010607060206020605080709
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

John Bokma wrote:
> Andrew DeFaria <Andrew [at] DeFaria.com> wrote:
>
>> Attachment decoded: text-html-3
> Oops, you just lost any credebility :-D
What a silly argument!

And you never had any credebility (sic) to start with!

ROTFLMAO, you guys bitch about "perl" vs. "Perl" saying that one must
pay attention to detail, yet you fail to recognize the little detail of
properly capitalizing sentences and proper names, etc. and then are
paying so much attention to detail that you can't even spell credibility
correctly! I mean was it not you John who just got finished saying:
"Because programming is about being very specific and exact. Details do
matter."???

And what's worse, you probably believe that somehow gives you
credibility!!!!
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
11th commandment - Covet not thy neighbor's Pentium.

--------------010607060206020605080709
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<style type="text/css">
body {
font: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;
}
p {
font: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;
}
..standout {
font-family: verdana,
arial,
sans-serif;
font-size: 12px;
color: #993333;
line-height: 13px;
font-weight: bold;
margin-bottom: 10px;
}
..code {
border-top: 1px solid #ddd;
border-left: 1px solid #ddd;
border-right: 2px solid #000;
border-bottom: 2px solid #000;
padding: 10px;
margin-top: 5px;
margin-left: 5%;
margin-right: 5%;
background: #ffffea;
color: black;
-moz-border-radius: 10px;
}
..codedark {
border-top: 10px solid #03f;
border-left: 1px solid #ddd;
border-right: 2px solid grey;
border-bottom: 2px solid grey;
padding: 10px;
margin-top: 5px;
margin-left: 5%;
margin-right: 5%;
background: black;
color: yellow;
-moz-border-radius: 10px;
}
#code {
color: black;
font-size: 14px;
font-family: courier;
padding-left: 5px;
}
#line-number {
color: #804000;
font-family: Arial;
font-size: 14px;
padding-right: 5px;
border-right: 1px dotted #804000;
}
blockquote[type=cite] {
padding: 0em .5em .5em .5em !important;
border-right: 2px solid blue !important;
border-left: 2px solid blue !important;
}
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite] {
border-right: 2px solid maroon !important;
border-left: 2px solid maroon !important;
}
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite] {
border-right: 2px solid teal !important;
border-left: 2px solid teal !important;
}
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite] {
border-right: 2px solid purple !important;
border-left: 2px solid purple !important;
}
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite] {
border-right: 2px solid green !important;
border-left: 2px solid green !important;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
John Bokma wrote:
<blockquote id="mid_Xns9A7883B083FCFcastleamber_130_133_1_4"
cite="mid:Xns9A7883B083FCFcastleamber [at] 130.133.1.4" type="cite">Andrew
DeFaria <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Andrew [at] DeFaria.com"><Andrew [at] DeFaria.com></a> wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote id="StationeryCiteGenerated_1" type="cite">Attachment
decoded: text-html-3<br>
</blockquote>
Oops, you just lost any credebility :-D<br>
</blockquote>
What a silly argument! <br>
<br>
And you never had any credebility (sic) to start with!<br>
<br>
ROTFLMAO, you guys bitch about "perl" vs. "Perl" saying that one must
pay attention to detail, yet you fail to recognize the little detail of
properly capitalizing sentences and proper names, etc. and then are
paying so much attention to detail that you can't even spell
credibility correctly! I mean was it not you John who just got finished
saying: "Because programming is about being very specific and exact.
Details do matter."???<br>
<br>
And what's worse, you probably believe that somehow gives you
credibility!!!!<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Andrew DeFaria<br>
<small><font color="#999999">11th commandment - Covet not thy
neighbor's Pentium.</font></small>
</div>
</body>
</html>

--------------010607060206020605080709--

Andrew DeFaria <Andrew [at] DeFaria.com> wrote:

You might want to fix TB to post only in plain text instead of attaching a
HTML version as well. (Moreover, you might want to use a fixed font while
viewing Usenet postings (unless you already do), it makes some of the code
snippets a bit easier on the eye and doesn't break ASCII art).

--
John

http://johnbokma.com/perl/

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070109070001020807060907
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

John Bokma wrote:
> Because programming is about being very specific and exact. Details do
> matter.
Exactly! Because otherwise you'll lose credebility! I know. John said
so! ;-)
>> I mean you have people like Abigail who use their own quote
>> characters, Uri who can't use a bloody shift key, etc,
> Yes, and me, who has English as a second language.
Bogus excuse. You've been told what is correct and you (well maybe not
you John but Abigail and Uri for sure) don't care and continue to do the
wrong thing. A word to the wise is sufficient as they say. Either you
are not wise or you purposely choose not to conform. If so then you are
in no position to lecture somebody else regarding this.
> As long as all those people don't write ambiguous statements related
> with the problem/answer, I don't have a problem with it.
Yes but others do have a problem with it.
> Yes. Look at the subject: perl should be improved. I read that as: the
> perl executable should be improved. I have very little to say on that
> subject (I am not a perl programmer/hacker)
You have been told that that's the incorrect interpretation. Now what
are you gonna do? Stubbornly insist that it is? And how is that productive?
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
As she lay there dozing next to me, one voice inside my head kept
saying, "Relax... you are not the first doctor to sleep with one of his
patients," but another kept reminding me, "Howard, you are a
veterinarian." - Roger Matthews

--------------070109070001020807060907
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<style type="text/css">
body {
font: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;
}
p {
font: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;
}
..standout {
font-family: verdana,
arial,
sans-serif;
font-size: 12px;
color: #993333;
line-height: 13px;
font-weight: bold;
margin-bottom: 10px;
}
..code {
border-top: 1px solid #ddd;
border-left: 1px solid #ddd;
border-right: 2px solid #000;
border-bottom: 2px solid #000;
padding: 10px;
margin-top: 5px;
margin-left: 5%;
margin-right: 5%;
background: #ffffea;
color: black;
-moz-border-radius: 10px;
}
..codedark {
border-top: 10px solid #03f;
border-left: 1px solid #ddd;
border-right: 2px solid grey;
border-bottom: 2px solid grey;
padding: 10px;
margin-top: 5px;
margin-left: 5%;
margin-right: 5%;
background: black;
color: yellow;
-moz-border-radius: 10px;
}
#code {
color: black;
font-size: 14px;
font-family: courier;
padding-left: 5px;
}
#line-number {
color: #804000;
font-family: Arial;
font-size: 14px;
padding-right: 5px;
border-right: 1px dotted #804000;
}
blockquote[type=cite] {
padding: 0em .5em .5em .5em !important;
border-right: 2px solid blue !important;
border-left: 2px solid blue !important;
}
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite] {
border-right: 2px solid maroon !important;
border-left: 2px solid maroon !important;
}
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite] {
border-right: 2px solid teal !important;
border-left: 2px solid teal !important;
}
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite] {
border-right: 2px solid purple !important;
border-left: 2px solid purple !important;
}
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite]
blockquote[type=cite] {
border-right: 2px solid green !important;
border-left: 2px solid green !important;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
John Bokma wrote:<br>
<blockquote id="mid_Xns9A7882C082C4Fcastleamber_130_133_1_4"
cite="mid:Xns9A7882C082C4Fcastleamber [at] 130.133.1.4" type="cite">Because
programming is about being very specific and exact. Details do matter. </blockquote>
Exactly! Because otherwise you'll lose credebility! I know. John said
so! <span class="moz-smiley-s3"><span> ;-) </span></span><br>
<blockquote id="mid_Xns9A7882C082C4Fcastleamber_130_133_1_4"
cite="mid:Xns9A7882C082C4Fcastleamber [at] 130.133.1.4" type="cite">
<blockquote id="StationeryCiteGenerated_8" type="cite">I mean you
have people like Abigail who use their own quote characters, Uri who
can't use a bloody shift key, etc,<br>
</blockquote>
<!---->Yes, and me, who has English as a second language.</blockquote>
Bogus excuse. You've been told what is correct and you (well maybe not
you John but Abigail and Uri for sure) don't care and continue to do
the wrong thing. A word to the wise is sufficient as they say. Either
you are not wise or you purposely choose not to conform. If so then you
are in no position to lecture somebody else regarding this.<br>
<blockquote id="mid_Xns9A7882C082C4Fcastleamber_130_133_1_4"
cite="mid:Xns9A7882C082C4Fcastleamber [at] 130.133.1.4" type="cite"> As
long as all those people don't write ambiguous statements related with
the problem/answer, I don't have a problem with it. <br>
</blockquote>
Yes but others do have a problem with it.<br>
<blockquote id="mid_Xns9A7882C082C4Fcastleamber_130_133_1_4"
cite="mid:Xns9A7882C082C4Fcastleamber [at] 130.133.1.4" type="cite">Yes.
Look at the subject: perl should be improved. I read that as: the perl
executable should be improved. I have very little to say on that
subject (I am not a perl programmer/hacker) <br>
</blockquote>
You have been told that that's the incorrect interpretation. Now what
are you gonna do? Stubbornly insist that it is? And how is that
productive?<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Andrew DeFaria<br>
<small><font color="#999999">As she lay there dozing next to me, one
voice inside my head kept saying, "Relax... you are not the first
doctor to sleep with one of his patients," but another kept reminding
me, "Howard, you are a veterinarian." - Roger Matthews</font></small>
</div>
</body>
</html>

--------------070109070001020807060907--