What does all this mean? It is clear that something is wrong and I think O'Reilly is trying to steer perl to make more money for themselves. They don't want you to program effectively, instead they want to create a new version that is so complicated even the designers don't understand it, so they can keep selling more books to everybody caught in their mouse-trap.
I have been a member of perlmonks.com for many years (I am logging in anonymously now because I know some of you are O'Reilly employees or friends of them and may react negitively), so this makes me very sad, but I think we should all move away from this language which is falling under corporate control. Instead, PHP has been gaining ground steadily and is already a better language, and it is real Open Source. So we should help people move to writing PHP instead. For this I propose we add a new section, entitled "PHP", where we can ask the questions on how to change a piece of perl into PHP and talk about building the future this way. Maybe this can be the start of a phpmonks community?
an O'Reilly employee admitted that O'Reilly is trying to control perl by using the viral GPL
chromatic did no such thing. He said that O'Reilly had donated Perl documentation to the Perl community. Either you didn't read the post, or you don't understand how the GPL works or you are deliberately just spreading FUD.
I propose we add a new section, entitled "PHP", where we can ask the questions on how to change a piece of perl into PHP and talk about building the future this way
Can't really see that being popular round here can you? If you really want to start "phpmonks", then the Everything Engine that powers Perlmonks is open source. Feel free to use it to set up your own community.
<http://dave.org.uk>
"The first rule of Perl club is you do not talk about
Perl club."
-- Chip Salzenberg
The code I wrote for this site is not and never will be available to the OP for use on a phpmonks.
alter ego of demerphq
What about rubymonks? ;-p
What I wouldn't give for a rubymonks.org . . .
Of course, I wouldn't give up my perlmonks.org, and phpmonks.org or pythonmonks.org would surely end up being ignored by me. Don't get me wrong: Python is a great language, but it's not for me — and I do use PHP quite a bit for low-end web development, even though it's a pretty rinky-dink language.
I'd just love to see something like perlmonks.org for Ruby. A lot.
|
- apotheon
CopyWrite Chad Perrin |
Not available to anyone for any purpose, then? That's too bad.
How do you go from "not being available to the op for use on phpmonks" to "not being available to anyone for any purpose"? If somebody were to ask me for copies of some of my code most likely Id be happy to hand it over. But im not going to hand over my code to someone like the OP. Which is my right. OTOH, if I were to release it under some kind of open source license then I couldnt stop the OP so I guess the "never" in my original statement was a bit extreme. Lets put it this way, the only way the OP will get his hands on my code on the site is if we GPL the whole lot. Wheras other people could get the code just by asking nicely.
alter ego of demerphq
I won't comment on the O'Reilly stuff because I don't see how it is relevant.
So we should help people move to writing PHP instead. For this I propose we add a new section, entitled "PHP", where we can ask the questions on how to change a piece of perl into PHP and talk about building the future this way. Maybe this can be the start of a phpmonks community?
PHP is popular because their community (as far as it exists) doesn't encourage or reward learning as much as the Perl community does. This may sound weird, but there are many programmers (or want-to-be-programmers) out there, that seek help, but are put off when they get pointers to documentation that doesn't directly answer their question, and only their question.
In fact, PHP is specifically catered for beginning programmers. When I tried to discuss lexical variables, the PHP developers more or less responded that it would too hard, too complex, too surprising, for their users. That says quite a lot about both PHP and its users, I think.
The Monastery on the other hand, does encourage learning and does reward it. There are many testimonials that state that Perl Monks helped people's Perl capabilities grow. If something like this site would work for PHP, then XP would be the only reason why. Anyone who's actually really smart doesn't write much about PHP without references to other languages, because they are curious about the rest of the world, and will discover that PHP sucks. But there are many people who do write PHP articles. My impression is that the eternal f(l)ame is the primary motivator, and we have that in the form of XP.
Even though XP could make a similar site work for PHP, I think that that could be construed as XP whoring. Also, every problem with Everything will be explained as a Perl issue, and the entire thing would be re-made in PHP. Probably with internals that are just as crappy (PHP doesn't really support clean and modular code), but with an exterior that's pretty and appealing. PHP would again present itself as something shiny and neat, and it would again be the Perl people who made it possible initially. That wouldn't really make me happy.
I do not believe that a new site could create a different kind of community for PHP, as it's eventually the programming language (it's lack of learning curve, and a builtin function for everything, including calculating the easterdate) that makes people initially try PHP, and keep the many ignorant programmers at that language.
The major benefit of this site, to me, has been that it greatly increased my Perl knowledge and wisdom. This was possible because Perl supports programming using real programming techniques. With an imperative-only language like PHP, I don't think anyone would really benefit from such a site, except for XP whores.
Juerd # { site => 'juerd.nl', plp_site => 'plp.juerd.nl', do_not_use => 'spamtrap' }
Anonymous monk, IMO you should be ashamed of yourself for even considering posting something as ill-considered as this excuse for a post.
Each language has it's own strengths (PHP and Perl are no different in this regard), but you should do a bit more research (and perhaps more importantly: completely understand what they were saying) before spewing what I consider to be ill-judged, poorly researched, and, ultimately, pretty much incorrect!
All this is IMO, by the by. But I can't imagine too many of the monks disagreeing with me, really.....
After you! :-)
By a curious coincidence I came across the troll cap today. How I wish I could add images to posts :-)
People should avoid answering him/her. Obvious they are either trying to bait people into a nonsensical argument or just spreading FUD. Their comments in the O'reilly post were just as stupid and idiotic.
The troll hat is an excellent idea and would stop people wasting theire time on stupid posts.
Hope someone in control of the monestry takes up the idea.
Displeaser.
Heh... I had a Dutch boss who used to call me 'clautsac' (unsure of spelling). Meant the same thing - scrotum. Course, I didn't know it at the time, only found out many years after I left that job...
I propose we add a new section, entitled "PHP"
FAQ: node 534057
An interesting idea, but totally idiotic reasoning behind it.
- 1) Perl is not becoming corporate controlled.
- 2) Even if it did, I'm not sure that would be bad. At least we'd have Perl 6 out within a year of MegaCorp taking it over.
- 3) Perl is GPL'ed so it can't become corporate controlled. At the very least you can fork the code.
- 4) PHP has a very specific purpose, interactive websites.
- 5) PHP fails pretty miserably when trying to do anything other than its specific purpose.
- 6) The PHP Open Source Development Team is not a group to emulate (just look at how they treat the OCIEnvNlsCreate() failed bug, I've been hit by bug too, but since they've decided to label it bogus there isn't any point to me reporting it again especially after how they treated that guy.)
Given that we don't see many questions here about converting stuff to or from PHP, I don't think we need a new section. Also since your reasons are completely loony, I'm going to have to -- your post. Congrats this is the first time in a number of months that I've actually found something in Worst Nodes section that belonged there.
To be read multiple times for extra entertainment value, in various tones of your choosing:
As you found out, the entire site membership consists of OReilly employees and their friends. With such a veritable army under their command, is it any wonder that OReilly is an overbearing force in the publishing market? Welcome your new overlords or perish!
Makeshifts last the longest.
I hesitate to reply to this obvious troll, but I will anyway. (What are fridays good for if not goofing off :-)
Firstly, perl6 has not been in development for "8 years". You could say that the idea of a newer, better perl has been kicked around since 1998 and recently there has been some serious development efforts. Perl6 didn't even come to fruition as an idea until 2000 and development didn't start in ernest later. (When exactly depends on what you consider "development")
Secondly ...
They (O'Reilly) don't want you to program effectively, instead they want to create a new version that is so complicated even the designers don't understand it, so they can keep selling more books to everybody caught in their mouse-trap.That's an interesting theory. How much money does O'Reilly make from perl books compared to all of the other books they sell? And if they're doing this to perl, who's to say that they won't also do the same to PHP, Python, Ruby, etc.? I mean, if they have a good racket going, why would they limit themselves to just perl? Oh, and how exactly is O'Reilly creating a new version of perl?
And lastly ...
Maybe this can be the start of a phpmonks community?Feel free to go and do just that. No one is stopping you.
I dunno... seems much ado about nothing. If you like the idea of a phpmonks, then I think you should try it out - I would think there would be many people who might join, because PHP is a very popular language. And once you've created phpmonks, you can add a section for Perl users trying to cross over to PHP. That would accomplish you stated goal quite nicely. You might call it something like "PHP for Recovering Perl Programmers"
Ok. You have to be wassercrats as many of your posts seem to deal with the "demise" of Perl. diotalevi deserves credit for pointing this out.
Again you have failed to prove corporate control. You have made false claims as to peoples intentions and their comments to your falsehoods.
Why stay here if you dislike Perl so much and love PHP all the more? Do you simply like trolling?
Do you really expect a useful answer?
Makeshifts last the longest.
In an answer to my last meditation, an O'Reilly employee admitted that O'Reilly is trying to control perl by using the viral GPL
You don't get how this works, do you? The GPL is viral, yes -- it's viral in a way that prevents any contributor from controlling the entire product. If O'Reilly contributes copyright-protected material to Perl, they are forced to license that contribution under the GPL. That license means that anyone is allowed to use and modify those contributions. Because they are forced to license in this way, it prevents them from controlling Perl, because they give up most of their control granted by the copyright.
In short, the GPL forces any contributing entity to give up control. BTW, everyone who has ever contributed to Perl has provided their copyright-protected material.
A collection of thoughts and links from the minds of geeks
The Code that can be seen is not the true Code
I haven't found a problem yet that can't be solved by a well-placed trebuchet
Seriously though: shut up.
zz zZ Z Z #!perl
I admit, I voted this post ++. Uaaaaaargh.
Although I totally refuse the PHP part, I'd like to stress some valid points of the poor poster.
To give you some perspective, I work mostly on statistical and geometrical algorithms, so that I have a lot of context switching between OO (application framework), procedural (numerics i.e. multidimensional numerical optimization), functional (inference) programming style. For such a situation perl is by far the most convenient language because I can chose the language constructs that are the most convenient for the task at hand.
However, there seems to be to much OO pressure in the development of perl6, to much closed shop style. All this "pattern" stuff, and "architecture" murmuring. Hate me, but this is like speaking about the windows, without thinking about the house.May be this is part of the language darwinism: those who get the most money have the most time can spend the most time for development in OS stuff like perl.
On the other hand, what is it useful for to convert perl 5 to yaool (pronounce it, with a long aooooooooo at night!) , that is yet another object oriented language? Moreover, doesn't this darwinian style selection mean that the future is sacrificed for the present?
Why are you worrying?
- There is no pressure to use OO in Perl 5. There will be no pressure to use OO in Perl 6.
- Perl 6 is not getting a makeover in the OO area alone. More, and more powerful, functional constructs will be possible in Perl 6 as well.
- Perl 5 is not going away.
Makeshifts last the longest.
this post freaks me out.
it wreaks like propaganda. It doesn't seem posted for discussion.
anybody else smell microsoft? am i way off?