7 ms·

The point was not your analogy. The point was that you made wild claims about something you obviously have no clue about. (That is why you write so damn much t

The point was not your analogy. The point was that you made wild claims about something you obviously have no clue about. (That is why you write so damn much text about something else. Standard behavior for non serious people that are shown to be wrong.) And the environment changes for everything in computing. Perl is extensible. The use is very different today compared to e.g. before the millennium before testing took over. So go troll on some subject you know. (Perl 6 is a different language in the same family. Quite a few features have been backported.)

logicallee 12y ago
I've flagged your post for your last sentence before your parentheses. Here are the forum guidelines: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say in a face to face conversation. When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. E.g. "That is an idiotic thing to say; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them." As for trolling, at the moment I have four and a half times your karma and am engaging in civil discourse. Try to do the same. You missed a serious implication with the fact that I'm writing about 'something else'. Which is that what I'm writing about has nothing to do with your language wars. Complaining that I would be wrong if I weren't writing about something else is similar to complaining that an obituary you have read shows extremely shoddy reporting, since a) you're alive, b) they got your birth date, gender, occupation, family history, professional history, and name wrong. They're clearly writing about someone else. Well, yes. I'm actually not part of your language war. I actually haven't made a single claim about Perl, nor rehashed any arguments. I explained what features I think a totally new language should have, and that the Perl community should start branding a totally new language as Perl, without starting out from Perl in any way. (As radically new as the iPad is to an Apple ][). It's my opinion. Without any compatibility or sense of being Perl in any other sense, just like there is zero continuity or compatibility between an Apple ][ and an iPad. Yes, I agree with you that Perl 6 is a different language in the same family. Perl 6 isn't a candidate for the language that I think should bear Perl branding in the future. In summary, I like the Perl community and want it to work on some other language and call it Perl. I've given a high-level description of some of the features that I think such a language should have. My main point is that you could brand anything you want as Perl. It doesn't have to still be Perl to be called Perl. If you disagree, that's fine, but you can't disagree with me for not writing about what you would like me to.
- BugBrother 12y ago
  >>I've flagged your post for your last sentence before your parentheses. Which were that you made wild claims about stuff you obviously know nothing. >>I actually haven't made a single claim about Perl :-) In the same comment you make explicit claims about what is part of "real" Perl and what is not: >>My main point is that you could brand anything you want as Perl. It doesn't have to still be Perl to be called Perl. (Quite fun, considering that programmable language extensions have been on CPAN (/in the Perl binary) for lots of years!) Originally, I reacted to this claim about what is "real" Perl: >>even though the modern language has [..] standard computer science constructs like OOP and Unicode etc that require coding against a different abstraction than Perl. That is not [ignorant] claims about Perl?! (There are more examples.) Again: The Perl Unicode support is one of the best of the scripting languages -- and todays std OO (Moo[se]) is arguably better than the other scripting languages. And OO has been in Perl 5 since the start (1990s). TL;DR: 1. TRIVIALLY bad claims. 2. Long messages without touching the bad claims. 3. "I never made any claims at all".
  - logicallee 12y ago
    In case it was an honest mistake, I was referring to "So go troll on some subject you know". Your way of parsing my reference as referring to your second sentence is extremely bizarre, though possible if you were hasty. If every variable is a reference to an object, that would be a different abstraction from Perl. "The modern language" refers to my hypothetical language which has nothing to do with Perl. My entire post refers to something hypothetical, which is why you state that it was written about 'something else'. We are not arguing, and I'm not making any claims about Perl. I am talking about a hypothetical language in which writing any normal Perl fails with a syntax error.
    - BugBrother 12y ago
      >>In case it was an honest mistake, I was referring You wrote "I've flagged your post for your last sentence before your parentheses." Which was what I discussed. (I did have a 2nd parenthesis, too.) >>I'm not making any claims about Perl. I quoted you twice as saying two old language features, which are probably best among the std scripting languages, goes against being Perl. At least one of those features is from the 1990s. That might mean something different than making claims, but you have carefully not touched it, despite multiple opportunities (while being both called "troll" and down voted over that).

logicallee 12y ago

I've flagged your post for your last sentence before your parentheses. Here are the forum guidelines: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say in a face to face conversation. When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. E.g. "That is an idiotic thing to say; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them." As for trolling, at the moment I have four and a half times your karma and am engaging in civil discourse. Try to do the same. You missed a serious implication with the fact that I'm writing about 'something else'. Which is that what I'm writing about has nothing to do with your language wars. Complaining that I would be wrong if I weren't writing about something else is similar to complaining that an obituary you have read shows extremely shoddy reporting, since a) you're alive, b) they got your birth date, gender, occupation, family history, professional history, and name wrong. They're clearly writing about someone else. Well, yes. I'm actually not part of your language war. I actually haven't made a single claim about Perl, nor rehashed any arguments. I explained what features I think a totally new language should have, and that the Perl community should start branding a totally new language as Perl, without starting out from Perl in any way. (As radically new as the iPad is to an Apple ][). It's my opinion. Without any compatibility or sense of being Perl in any other sense, just like there is zero continuity or compatibility between an Apple ][ and an iPad. Yes, I agree with you that Perl 6 is a different language in the same family. Perl 6 isn't a candidate for the language that I think should bear Perl branding in the future. In summary, I like the Perl community and want it to work on some other language and call it Perl. I've given a high-level description of some of the features that I think such a language should have. My main point is that you could brand anything you want as Perl. It doesn't have to still be Perl to be called Perl. If you disagree, that's fine, but you can't disagree with me for not writing about what you would like me to.

BugBrother 12y ago
>>I've flagged your post for your last sentence before your parentheses. Which were that you made wild claims about stuff you obviously know nothing. >>I actually haven't made a single claim about Perl :-) In the same comment you make explicit claims about what is part of "real" Perl and what is not: >>My main point is that you could brand anything you want as Perl. It doesn't have to still be Perl to be called Perl. (Quite fun, considering that programmable language extensions have been on CPAN (/in the Perl binary) for lots of years!) Originally, I reacted to this claim about what is "real" Perl: >>even though the modern language has [..] standard computer science constructs like OOP and Unicode etc that require coding against a different abstraction than Perl. That is not [ignorant] claims about Perl?! (There are more examples.) Again: The Perl Unicode support is one of the best of the scripting languages -- and todays std OO (Moo[se]) is arguably better than the other scripting languages. And OO has been in Perl 5 since the start (1990s). TL;DR: 1. TRIVIALLY bad claims. 2. Long messages without touching the bad claims. 3. "I never made any claims at all".
- logicallee 12y ago
  In case it was an honest mistake, I was referring to "So go troll on some subject you know". Your way of parsing my reference as referring to your second sentence is extremely bizarre, though possible if you were hasty. If every variable is a reference to an object, that would be a different abstraction from Perl. "The modern language" refers to my hypothetical language which has nothing to do with Perl. My entire post refers to something hypothetical, which is why you state that it was written about 'something else'. We are not arguing, and I'm not making any claims about Perl. I am talking about a hypothetical language in which writing any normal Perl fails with a syntax error.
  - BugBrother 12y ago
    >>In case it was an honest mistake, I was referring You wrote "I've flagged your post for your last sentence before your parentheses." Which was what I discussed. (I did have a 2nd parenthesis, too.) >>I'm not making any claims about Perl. I quoted you twice as saying two old language features, which are probably best among the std scripting languages, goes against being Perl. At least one of those features is from the 1990s. That might mean something different than making claims, but you have carefully not touched it, despite multiple opportunities (while being both called "troll" and down voted over that).