4 ms·

Nope. Its darwinian, the more modules in the gene pool means newer/better solutions need to fight harder to survive & win. So the outcome is often better for

Nope. Its darwinian, the more modules in the gene pool means newer/better solutions need to fight harder to survive & win. So the outcome is often better for Perl/CPAN, for eg. Moose

danssig 16y ago
That's your assumption. Higher quantity in no way implies that the quality entries will be higher than they would be in a system with less quantity.
- draegtun 16y ago
  You're the one who keeps making assumptions! My statements about darwinism and also about Moose being better for Perl/CPAN are factually correct.
  - danssig 16y ago
    >My statements about darwinism Darwinism has nothing to do with this. At best you're trying to invent a connection that doesn't exist.
    - draegtun 16y ago
      Clearly darwinism hasn't made trolls extinct yet :) Based on your comments here and the fact you're a newly created account then I am going to have to make the assumption that trolls do indeed exist among us :(
      - danssig 16y ago
        You seriously think I made this account just to troll you? Talk about defensive.
        draegtun 16y ago
        You seriously think I made this account just to troll you? Of course not, that is just an assumption of yours ;-) Seriously though I do feel your comments have had a troll tone and my previous statement was half in jest. So I do apologise sincerely if you have taken offence to it. So again sorry and welcome aboard HN.
igneous4 16y ago
> Its darwinian I think you're correct, but that there are trade-offs. Take Python, for example. They have "batteries included", and when modules make it into the std lib, they pretty much stop evolving. However, on the up-side, Python gains users who like having everything packaged up nice and neat so they don't need to go looking for modules quite as much. Perl takes the popularity hit of not having too many batteries included, but benefits from the darwinian element that works to make the 3rd-party modules better. So, perlers need to spend more time asking around (or checking cpanratings), and also dealing with it when there's turnover (the module that they chose a few years ago is eclipsed by a competitor, or stops being maintained, and now they need to rewrite some of their code). In the end, I think Perl has better modules.
- draegtun 16y ago
  Yes i've touched briefly on CPAN vs stdlib approach before (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2088040 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2088040). They're just different approaches and neither is better or worse than the other. BTW... I believe all language repos will have darwinism acting upon it. I see it in Ruby & Python as well as on CPAN. Its Perl philosophy and CPAN size that just stirs the pot a bit more!

Nope. Its darwinian, the more modules in the gene pool means newer/better solutions need to fight harder to survive & win. So the outcome is often better for Perl/CPAN, for eg. Moose

danssig 16y ago

That's your assumption. Higher quantity in no way implies that the quality entries will be higher than they would be in a system with less quantity.

draegtun 16y ago
You're the one who keeps making assumptions! My statements about darwinism and also about Moose being better for Perl/CPAN are factually correct.
- danssig 16y ago
  >My statements about darwinism Darwinism has nothing to do with this. At best you're trying to invent a connection that doesn't exist.
  - draegtun 16y ago
    Clearly darwinism hasn't made trolls extinct yet :) Based on your comments here and the fact you're a newly created account then I am going to have to make the assumption that trolls do indeed exist among us :(
    - danssig 16y ago
      You seriously think I made this account just to troll you? Talk about defensive.
      - draegtun 16y ago
        You seriously think I made this account just to troll you? Of course not, that is just an assumption of yours ;-) Seriously though I do feel your comments have had a troll tone and my previous statement was half in jest. So I do apologise sincerely if you have taken offence to it. So again sorry and welcome aboard HN.

igneous4 16y ago

> Its darwinian I think you're correct, but that there are trade-offs. Take Python, for example. They have "batteries included", and when modules make it into the std lib, they pretty much stop evolving. However, on the up-side, Python gains users who like having everything packaged up nice and neat so they don't need to go looking for modules quite as much. Perl takes the popularity hit of not having too many batteries included, but benefits from the darwinian element that works to make the 3rd-party modules better. So, perlers need to spend more time asking around (or checking cpanratings), and also dealing with it when there's turnover (the module that they chose a few years ago is eclipsed by a competitor, or stops being maintained, and now they need to rewrite some of their code). In the end, I think Perl has better modules.

draegtun 16y ago
Yes i've touched briefly on CPAN vs stdlib approach before (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2088040 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2088040). They're just different approaches and neither is better or worse than the other. BTW... I believe all language repos will have darwinism acting upon it. I see it in Ruby & Python as well as on CPAN. Its Perl philosophy and CPAN size that just stirs the pot a bit more!