4 ms·

Well that's great... For your very narrow use case.. It is not however an effective rebuttal to the points brought up in a more general case.

VLM 13y ago
"It is not however an effective rebuttal to the points brought up in a more general case." Where is this general case? I clicked thru the presentation and it boils down to here are some obscure yet interesting and trendy corners of the computational world where Perl doesn't work well, therefore we have to change everything. We could have had the same presentation 20 years ago, just the trendy weird corners would have to change to match the times. Doesn't mean those trendy corners are useless, just not required to write 'good code'. Not that the goals are inherently awful. I don't do anything requiring UTF-8 at work. Someday I probably will, and it'll probably be a PITA. I tend to see this kind of presentation as rabble rousing. "Here's some stuff that other languages care about, although you don't care, but it obviously doesn't prevent any of you from being profitable and gainfully employed writing good code so its obviously not required, which is why Perl doesn't have it. If I can convince you to care about it, Perl would gain it or more likely you'd just leave Perl. Hope you feel uplifted, here's some internet meme pictures, k thx bye" I'm not sure other languages consider it "insightful" when they get a cut and paste rephrasing of the same presentation, which is possibly the most interesting part of the whole story.
mhurron 13y ago
Wait, you think opening and reading files of various sizes is a narrow case for a language named Practical Extraction and Report Language?
- TylerE 13y ago
  In the case of arguing for general relevance, yes. It's like saying: Hey, all I do is bang in nails! The hammer is only tool anyone ever needs!

4 ms·

Well that's great... For your very narrow use case.. It is not however an effective rebuttal to the points brought up in a more general case.

by mkohlmyr 13y ago

VLM 13y ago
"It is not however an effective rebuttal to the points brought up in a more general case." Where is this general case? I clicked thru the presentation and it boils down to here are some obscure yet interesting and trendy corners of the computational world where Perl doesn't work well, therefore we have to change everything. We could have had the same presentation 20 years ago, just the trendy weird corners would have to change to match the times. Doesn't mean those trendy corners are useless, just not required to write 'good code'. Not that the goals are inherently awful. I don't do anything requiring UTF-8 at work. Someday I probably will, and it'll probably be a PITA. I tend to see this kind of presentation as rabble rousing. "Here's some stuff that other languages care about, although you don't care, but it obviously doesn't prevent any of you from being profitable and gainfully employed writing good code so its obviously not required, which is why Perl doesn't have it. If I can convince you to care about it, Perl would gain it or more likely you'd just leave Perl. Hope you feel uplifted, here's some internet meme pictures, k thx bye" I'm not sure other languages consider it "insightful" when they get a cut and paste rephrasing of the same presentation, which is possibly the most interesting part of the whole story.
mhurron 13y ago
Wait, you think opening and reading files of various sizes is a narrow case for a language named Practical Extraction and Report Language?
- TylerE 13y ago
  In the case of arguing for general relevance, yes. It's like saying: Hey, all I do is bang in nails! The hammer is only tool anyone ever needs!