Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

I am noting the continued demise of Perl programming.

Participation within this group is down about seventy-five
percent from traditional historical averages. The new
"perl.beginners" groups are the verge of extinction.

Of interest to me is the policy of "banishment" by the
Perl beginners groups. The main group, perl.beginners,
participation is cut in half and more since a banishment
policy has been effected. The beginners cgi group is down
to a near zero participation level.

Perl was once an open source programming language. Today,
this is not true. Many proficient Perl programmers are no
longer allowed to participate in discussions of Perl. This,
of course, does contribute to the demise of Perl programming.

Looks to me a select few are converting Perl into a "closed source"
programming language, this is, only allowing a select few to
continue participating in discussions of and development of
the Perl programming language.

Rather sad to watch a once thriving community of Perl programmers
degrade into a Good Ol' Boys club which shuns all but a very
select few.

This banishment policy is the expected outcome of what I have
noted for years; the Perl Community is a very hostile community.

Couple more years, Perl will be extinct and you select few
Good Ol' Boys will have Perl all to yourselves, as you intend.

Got Perl 6?

--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Purl Gurl wrote:


Stop barking at the wrong trees.

> Got Perl 6?

Oh, and here's your cookie:


Happy and moreover a sane 2008.

--
John

How to get wireless up & running on an Acer Aspire 4320:
http://johnbokma.com/mexit/2007/12/29/

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

John Bokma wrote:

> Purl Gurl wrote:

> Stop barking at the wrong trees.

Say, are not you the boy who was stalking me
for a period of time?

I would not bother barking up your tree. I would
rather run around in circles barking at my big butt.

Besides, you boys do, every so often, fall out of
your tree. I do not think you are any smarter for it.


>> Got Perl 6?

> Oh, and here's your cookie:
>

How nice. Seven years later, or is it eight years later,
Perl 6 is still not released.


> Happy and moreover a sane 2008.

Being sane is rather boring. I like living a wild life.

Best of a New Year to all you sissified geeks!

--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On Jan 1, 3:49=A0pm, Purl Gurl wrote:


> How nice. Seven years later, or is it eight years later,
> Perl 6 is still not released.

Yes !!! ... God *does* exist.

Cheers,
Rob

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Purl Gurl wrote:

> John Bokma wrote:
>
>> Purl Gurl wrote:
>
>> Stop barking at the wrong trees.
>
> Say, are not you the boy who was stalking me
> for a period of time?

No, I was the boy who added some text at the end of a URL and you made a
big boo boo out of it :-)


[ perl6 ]
> How nice. Seven years later, or is it eight years later,
> Perl 6 is still not released.

You're old enough to know that designing something good takes a lot of
time. I rather have it done good, compared to releasing as soon as
possible.

>> Happy and moreover a sane 2008.
>
> Being sane is rather boring. I like living a wild life.

A live can be too wild if you see stalkers at every corner.

> Best of a New Year to all you sissified geeks!

Thanks

--
John

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

sisyphus wrote:

> Purl Gurl wrote:

>> How nice. Seven years later, or is it eight years later,
>> Perl 6 is still not released.

> Yes !!! ... God *does* exist.

Highly unlikely Perl 6 will be released. My estimation
is the Perl 6 project will be abandoned, for the most part.

After seven or eight years of effort, Perl 6 remains years
away from release based on current stage of development,
which is not much; Perl 6 is riddled with bugs and problems.

Perl 6 is already antiquated, already vapor-ware.

Perl 4 was the most sleek, the most efficient version
of Perl ever released. Perl 4 is a lean and mean machine.
Perl 4 should have never been abandoned.

With the gods of Perl currently placing emphasis on banishing
long time well known Perl programmers, this is the final coffin
nail for Perl. This language is already dead.

Perl is now an antiquated collector's item laid to rest upon
a shelf to collect dust and cobwebs.

Rather ironic, this did not have to be.

--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

John Bokma wrote:

> Purl Gurl wrote:
>> John Bokma wrote:
>>> Purl Gurl wrote:

>> Say, are not you the boy who was stalking me
>> for a period of time?

> No, I was the boy who added some text at the end of a URL and you made a
> big boo boo out of it :-)


Yes, you are the boy who stalked and harassed me for
a long period of time, even over the objections of
others who found your behavior unacceptable.


--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On 2008-01-01, Purl Gurl wrote:
>
> Yes, you are the boy who stalked and harassed me for
> a long period of time,


Perhaps you're thinking of the MI5 spammer?

--keith


--
kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Purl Gurl wrote:

> John Bokma wrote:

[..]

>> No, I was the boy who added some text at the end of a URL and you
>> made a big boo boo out of it :-)
>
>
> Yes, you are the boy who stalked and harassed me for
> a long period of time,

Which part of "No" you don't understand?

--
John

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Purl Gurl wrote:

> sisyphus wrote:
>
>> Purl Gurl wrote:
>
>>> How nice. Seven years later, or is it eight years later,
>>> Perl 6 is still not released.
>
>> Yes !!! ... God *does* exist.
>
> Highly unlikely Perl 6 will be released. My estimation
> is the Perl 6 project will be abandoned, for the most part.

From what I understand, already lessons learned from Perl 6 are
available in Perl 5.10. And even earlier if you can be bothered to check
out CPAN.

So even if you were right (hah!), it certainly wasn't a lost case like
the one you prefer to paint, and that just because of a grudge you have
been holding for years.

> After seven or eight years of effort, Perl 6 remains years
> away from release based on current stage of development,
> which is not much; Perl 6 is riddled with bugs and problems.

I rather have it released when it's right. I am happy Perl never
suffered from the issues PHP has been suffering from (and probably still
is suffering from)

> Perl 6 is already antiquated,

Please elaborate.

> already vapor-ware.
>
> Perl 4 was the most sleek, the most efficient version
> of Perl ever released. Perl 4 is a lean and mean machine.
> Perl 4 should have never been abandoned.

Nobody is going to stop you from maintaining Perl 4 and make it even
more sleek :-).

> With the gods of Perl currently placing emphasis on banishing
> long time well known Perl programmers,

Like?


> this is the final coffin
> nail for Perl. This language is already dead.

So what are you doing here?

> Perl is now an antiquated collector's item laid to rest upon
> a shelf to collect dust and cobwebs.

As long as it provides me with nice paid for projects,
I am ok with it.

Also Linux Journal (IIRC) and Linux Magazine (for sure) publish often
enough solid articles written by excellent writers (Hi Randal, Hi
chromatic). Why would a magazine waste space on a dead language?

--
John

Arachnids near Coyolillo - part 1
http://johnbokma.com/mexit/2006/05/04/arachnids-coyolillo-1. html

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma writes:

JB> Also Linux Journal (IIRC) and Linux Magazine (for sure) publish often
JB> enough solid articles written by excellent writers (Hi Randal, Hi
JB> chromatic). Why would a magazine waste space on a dead language?

and why are you wasting time on brain dead moronzilla? it is obviously
let loose from the asylum for its annual foray here. best to ignore it
or refute its stupider perl comments but not to engage it. delusional
posters can't be argued with. and of course it will flame me as i am one
of its secret lovers and stalkers. it has so many stalkers which is
proof enough that none exist. and yes, the proper pronoun for moronzilla
is 'it'. not a human let alone one with any gender. the peace was so
nice this last few months. oh well. just wait it out until it gets
locked up again for the season.

uri

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.stemsystems.com
--Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding-
Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Uri Guttman wrote:

(snipped)

> and why are you wasting time on brain dead moronzilla? it is obviously
> let loose from the asylum for its annual foray here. best to ignore it
> or refute its stupider perl comments but not to engage it. delusional
> posters can't be argued with. and of course it will flame me as i am one
> of its secret lovers and stalkers. it has so many stalkers which is
> proof enough that none exist. and yes, the proper pronoun for moronzilla
> is 'it'. not a human let alone one with any gender. the peace was so
> nice this last few months. oh well. just wait it out until it gets
> locked up again for the season.


Uri loves me! Uri loves me!

I just knew you are madly in love with me!

Oh, you are such a stud of a sissified geek!

* swoons *


--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma writes:

JB> Purl Gurl wrote:

>> this is the final coffin nail for Perl. This language is
>> already dead.

JB> So what are you doing here?

Trolling, and she's got her hook firmly implanted in you. Plonk her
and spare us the noise, please.

Charlton


--
Charlton Wilbur
cwilbur@chromatico.net

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Charlton Wilbur wrote:

> and she's got her hook firmly implanted in you.

You're mistaken.

> Plonk her and spare us the noise, please.

The noise you're adding to as well? Or you think you're above me or what?

--
John

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Uri Guttman wrote:

>>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma writes:
>
> JB> Also Linux Journal (IIRC) and Linux Magazine (for sure) publish
> often JB> enough solid articles written by excellent writers (Hi
> Randal, Hi JB> chromatic). Why would a magazine waste space on a
> dead language?
>
> and why are you wasting time on brain dead moronzilla?

and why are you wasting your time by adding to this thread?

--
John

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On Dec 31 2007, 7:20=A0pm, Purl Gurl wrote:
> I am noting the continued demise of Perl programming.
>
> Participation within this group is down about seventy-five
> percent from traditional historical averages. The new
> "perl.beginners" groups are the verge of extinction.
>
> Of interest to me is the policy of "banishment" by the
> Perl beginners groups. The main group, perl.beginners,
> participation is cut in half and more since a banishment
> policy has been effected. The beginners cgi group is down
> to a near zero participation level.
>
> Perl was once an open source programming language. Today,
> this is not true. Many proficient Perl programmers are no
> longer allowed to participate in discussions of Perl. This,
> of course, does contribute to the demise of Perl programming.
>
> Looks to me a select few are converting Perl into a "closed source"
> programming language, this is, only allowing a select few to
> continue participating in discussions of and development of
> the Perl programming language.
>
> Rather sad to watch a once thriving community of Perl programmers
> degrade into a Good Ol' Boys club which shuns all but a very
> select few.
>
> This banishment policy is the expected outcome of what I have
> noted for years; the Perl Community is a very hostile community.
>
> Couple more years, Perl will be extinct and you select few
> Good Ol' Boys will have Perl all to yourselves, as you intend.
>
> Got Perl 6?
>
> --
> Purl Gurl
> --
> So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
> like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

What in the world have you been smoking?

Robert

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma writes:

JB> Uri Guttman wrote:
>>>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma writes:
>>
JB> Also Linux Journal (IIRC) and Linux Magazine (for sure) publish
>> often JB> enough solid articles written by excellent writers (Hi
>> Randal, Hi JB> chromatic). Why would a magazine waste space on a
>> dead language?
>>
>> and why are you wasting time on brain dead moronzilla?

JB> and why are you wasting your time by adding to this thread?

to warn those who will see this on google about the dangers of
moronzilla. been doing that for some time now. i had a vacation while it
was locked up again. back to the grindstone. :(

uri

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.stemsystems.com
--Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding-
Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma writes:

JB> Charlton Wilbur wrote:

>> Plonk her and spare us the noise, please.

JB> The noise you're adding to as well? Or you think you're above
JB> me or what?

No, I think that a little bit of noise directed at a potentially
reasonable person in the interests of preventing that person from
creating a lot of noise and looking like an ass is a good little bit
of noise.

Are you not a reasonable person then? Or do you not care that you
look like an ass when you argue with Purl Gurl? In either case, carry
on, and I'll be happy to plonk you as well; no skin off my nose either
way.

Charlton


--
Charlton Wilbur
cwilbur@chromatico.net

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Uri Guttman wrote:

>>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma writes:
>
> JB> Uri Guttman wrote:
> >>>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma writes:
> >>
> JB> Also Linux Journal (IIRC) and Linux Magazine (for sure) publish
> >> often JB> enough solid articles written by excellent writers (Hi
> >> Randal, Hi JB> chromatic). Why would a magazine waste space on a
> >> dead language?
> >>
> >> and why are you wasting time on brain dead moronzilla?
>
> JB> and why are you wasting your time by adding to this thread?
>
> to warn those who will see this on google about the dangers of
> moronzilla. been doing that for some time now. i had a vacation while it
> was locked up again. back to the grindstone. :(

Likewise I was trying to warn people that Perl is not dead, people are
working on Perl 6 (and more and more Perl 6 ideas show up in Perl 5,
either directly, or via CPAN), and that there are at least 2 magazines
that publish Perl code (which I enjoy). I don't consider that a waste of
time. Moreover, I would say we're on the same side, if there is such a
thing ;-)

--
John

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Charlton Wilbur wrote:


> on, and I'll be happy to plonk you as well;

*plonk*

--
John

Arachnids near Coyolillo - part 1
http://johnbokma.com/mexit/2006/05/04/arachnids-coyolillo-1. html

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma writes:

JB> Uri Guttman wrote:
>>>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma writes:
>>
JB> Uri Guttman wrote:

>> to warn those who will see this on google about the dangers of
>> moronzilla. been doing that for some time now. i had a vacation
>> while it was locked up again. back to the grindstone. :(

JB> Likewise I was trying to warn people that Perl is not dead, people are
JB> working on Perl 6 (and more and more Perl 6 ideas show up in Perl 5,
JB> either directly, or via CPAN), and that there are at least 2 magazines
JB> that publish Perl code (which I enjoy). I don't consider that a waste of
JB> time. Moreover, I would say we're on the same side, if there is such a
JB> thing ;-)

i have no issues with your defense of perl but you best not do it by
engaging moronzilla in a thread. it is like a tarbaby and the more you
touch it the more you get stuck. i don't think you have seen it in
action before so google away. your psyche may never be the same
again. there is a certain skill to warding off others to moronzilla. for
one thing it preys on newbies (she got kicked from the beginners list)
who don't know better. its stupid answers may work sometimes (rarely but
like a stopped clock) so newbies fall for its sticky bait. a few realize
quickly enough that moronzilla is a cesspool of stupid and useless
knowledge of perl and programming in general. ask it a question about
anything outside its tiny range of knowledge (algorithms or references
are fun ones!) and you won't get a reply. it sticks to the simple perl4
stuff of trivial text munging and web stuff. see its posts on how bad
perl5 is and yet it espouses it now. its rants on perl6 are so silly as
to be worth publishing for their humor. it knows nothing about p6 nor
understands a single aspect of it. hell, it doesn't know p5 at all
either.

this comes from too many years of its trolling here. somehow it takes a
break when it gets locked up for a few months at a time. and i wish it
accepted its own delusion of perl being dead and it infects some other
language like python. they will love it there!

uri

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.stemsystems.com
--Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding-
Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On 2008-01-02 00:04, John Bokma wrote:
> Purl Gurl wrote:
>> Perl is now an antiquated collector's item laid to rest upon
>> a shelf to collect dust and cobwebs.
[...]
> Also Linux Journal (IIRC) and Linux Magazine (for sure) publish often
> enough solid articles written by excellent writers (Hi Randal, Hi
> chromatic). Why would a magazine waste space on a dead language?
>

Because Linux is obsolete, too?

SCNR,
hp

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Uri Guttman wrote:

(snipped to the Osama heart of the matter)

>>> to warn those who will see this on google about the dangers of
>>> moronzilla. been doing that for some time now. i had a vacation
>>> while it was locked up again. back to the grindstone. :(

> i have no issues with your defense of perl but you best not do it by
> engaging moronzilla in a thread. it is like a tarbaby and the more you
> touch it the more you get stuck. i don't think you have seen it in
> action before so google away. your psyche may never be the same
> again. there is a certain skill to warding off others to moronzilla. for
> one thing it preys on newbies (she got kicked from the beginners list)

Well, there you go! Uri provides an unsolicited confession
the Perl Community is a Good Ol' Boys Club which practices
iron fist censorship suitable for Islamic Osama Bin Laden.

There are very many long time well known Perl programmers who
are shunned and banished by the Perl Community based simply on
personal like or personal dislike, and for no other reason. This
abhorrent behavior is so pervasive within the Perl Community,
even a well respected and well liked CPAN maintainer is chased
out of the Perl Community through insult and hatred. No surprise
she is female.

You childish Osama boys will recall your efforts at banishing
folks from USENET through concerted and coordinated efforts of
filing complaints with others news servers. Boy Howdy! You talk
about rancid censorship derived from pure hatred! Not only hatred,
you boys practiced outright deceit; you told a lot of lies.

Of course there is this absolute comedy of a very childish and a
very impotent attempt to censor by registering purlgurl.net in an
effort to legitimize complaints about using a munged email address,
which is a very common and a very well accepted practice. Did not work.
Today, I own purlgurl.net and am quite famous for it!

Now you have taken to employing news group server software to
banish others from USENET. Imagine that! Our USENET is founded,
very strongly founded on a principle of Freedom of Speech and
yet you boys behave as Taliban book burners!

You cannot stoop much lower than violating the very premise
of USENET through banishment based upon personal hatred.

Since you recently began violating the very spirit of USENET,
what has happened to the perl beginners groups? They are DEAD!
You banished so many people, word of your violating the very
spirit of USENET has spread so much, very few are willing to
participate within Perl discussion groups.

People are completely burnt out by your hateful censorship.

Look at data statistics for this group, for all Perl groups.
These Perl discussion groups are dead, are extinct. This is
directly contributed to your hatred and harassment of others.

Ask O'Reilly about sales statistics for Perl books. DEAD!

Perl programming and Perl development is also quite dead.

You boys and your bloated childish egos have destroyed Perl.
Your childish, selfish and hateful ways are directly responsible
for the killing of Perl.


--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Purl Gurl wrote:

(snipped)

> Uri Guttman wrote:

> (snipped to the Osama heart of the matter)

>> one thing it preys on newbies (she got kicked from the beginners list)


> Well, there you go! Uri provides an unsolicited confession
> the Perl Community is a Good Ol' Boys Club which practices
> iron fist censorship suitable for Islamic Osama Bin Laden.


From the Perl beginners group,

"Thanks to Rob and purlgurl, who answered me by mail. It turns out
RemoteName was wrong. Nevertheless, it worked when I didn't define
other RemoteShare parameters. Could anyone explain that?
Since I have a shared folder named Nash on computer named Nash, \\\
\Nash\\Nash did the trick...."


Here I am, a seasoned and talented Perl programmer
helping "newbies" learn Perl, despite your violation
of USENET spirit through banishment from newsgroups.

You boys claim, you boys lie, you boys scream I "prey"
upon Newbies yet here I am using my personal private
time to help a "newbie" who is in need, who needs help
and is not receiving help from you "Perl Professionals."

There you are, banishing people right and left, there
you are violating the very spirit of USENET, there you
are preventing "newbies" from receiving requested help.

I am quite amused by all those "Perl Professionals" over
in the Perl beginners group who could not provide a single
viable solution, who could only guess, incorrectly, at a
viable solution. Not one of those "Perl Professionals"
have enough Perl knowledge to recognize such a simple
problem in Perl programming.

You boys use news group server software to banish those
who afford the most and the best quality Perl programming
advice, you boys violate our very premise founding USENET,
you violate Freedom of Speech like Islamic Taliban, yet
turn right around then lie to the public about your true
intentions, and lie to the public about your sore lacking
of Perl programming knowledge.

You boys are better suited for life in Syria.

What a collection of bozo egotistical stringless yo-yos!

You boys are directly responsible for the killing of Perl.

***

BEGIN QUOTE FROM PRIVATE EMAIL


Nash wrote:

> Chas Owens wrote:

(snipped)

> I still don't know what I'm doing wrong :(

> 'RemoteName' => "\\\\Nash",


You are using the wrong RemoteName variable value.

This should be similar to,

\\\\Nash\\Nash C

"Nash" is the name of your remote computer.

"Nash C" is your remote device which is approved
to be shared on your network. This might be your
drive C on your remote Nash machine.

Another example

\\\\Nash\\Nash C\\My Documents

This would connect to your "My Documents" directory.


Use this script to look at your remote names. This script
will list both your local and remote shared devices. You
can pull a correct RemoteName from the returned list.


use Win32::NetResource qw(:DEFAULT GetSharedResources GetError);

my $resources = [];
unless(GetSharedResources($resources, RESOURCETYPE_ANY)) {
my $err = undef;
GetError($err);
warn Win32::FormatMessage($err);
}

foreach my $href (@$resources) {
next if ($$href{DisplayType} != RESOURCEDISPLAYTYPE_SHARE);
print "-----\n";
foreach( keys %$href){
print "$_: $href->{$_}\n";
}
}


This script above is copied from here,

http://www.xav.com/perl/site/lib/Win32/NetResource.html

You will find additional information there.


I would discuss this for you in the perl.beginners newsgroup
but a majority of Perl programmers are banished from the group.
The perl.beginners group is heavily censored; only a very few
are allowed to participate.


END QUOTE FROM PRIVATE EMAIL


--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma writes:

JB> Charlton Wilbur wrote:
>> on, and I'll be happy to plonk you as well;

JB> *plonk*

Well, I guess I was wrong in my supposition that you might be reasonable.

Charlton


--
Charlton Wilbur
cwilbur@chromatico.net

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Purl Gurl wrote:

> Purl Gurl wrote:
>> Uri Guttman wrote:

>> (snipped to the Osama heart of the matter)

>>> one thing it preys on newbies (she got kicked from the beginners list)

>> Well, there you go! Uri provides an unsolicited confession
>> the Perl Community is a Good Ol' Boys Club which practices
>> iron fist censorship suitable for Islamic Osama Bin Laden.

> From the Perl beginners group,

> "Thanks to Rob and purlgurl, who answered me by mail. It turns out


Which reminds me. I note you "Perl Professionals" are
incapable of preventing the MI5 lunatic from spamming
your precious perl beginners news group.

What is up with that? Is it you boys are such piss poor
Perl programmers you cannot prevent the MI5 nutcase
from spamming your Taliban censored news group?

Ha! Stringless yo-yos!

Thank goodness, for you, I am gracious enough to always use
my same email address and to always use a static IP address.
If not for my adherence to USENET spirit, you boys would
not have a clue how to banish me and other Perl programmers
from your "public" USENET group.

I never imagined you, of our Perl Community, would stoop
so low, resort to such despicable tactics as censoring
USENET news groups like Islamic terrorists.

You boys of the Perl Community lie to the public, claim
you are protecting USENET while behind the backs of all,
you are censoring USENET which is the most loathsome
of all unethical actions you can take against our
revered "Freedom of Speech" USENET.

You boys are directly responsible for the killing of Perl.


--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

"Peter J. Holzer" wrote:

> On 2008-01-02 00:04, John Bokma wrote:
>> Purl Gurl wrote:
>>> Perl is now an antiquated collector's item laid to rest upon
>>> a shelf to collect dust and cobwebs.
> [...]
>> Also Linux Journal (IIRC) and Linux Magazine (for sure) publish often
>> enough solid articles written by excellent writers (Hi Randal, Hi
>> chromatic). Why would a magazine waste space on a dead language?
>>
>
> Because Linux is obsolete, too?
>
> SCNR,
> hp

:-D. Let's hope not, I mean I am just about to switch entirely away from
Windows.

--
John

http://johnbokma.com/

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

John Bokma wrote:

> Peter J. Holzer wrote:
>> John Bokma wrote:
>>> Purl Gurl wrote:

>>>> Perl is now an antiquated collector's item laid to rest upon
>>>> a shelf to collect dust and cobwebs.

>>> Also Linux Journal (IIRC) and Linux Magazine (for sure) publish often
>>> enough solid articles written by excellent writers (Hi Randal, Hi
>>> chromatic). Why would a magazine waste space on a dead language?

>> Because Linux is obsolete, too?

> :-D. Let's hope not, I mean I am just about to switch entirely away from
> Windows.

There was a time I ran Linux Redhat on one of my machines.
However, with Redhat being dumped by Linux, I elected to
switch back to Windows. Annoying, I have a lot of reference
books for Linux, of no use anymore.

Fedora is ok but not aggressive enough for my likes. Many, if
not most of the features wanted by typical users are missing.

Linux is suffering severe problems with copyright and patent
issues. Linux is very limited in what features can be offered.
Linux is very nice for an operating system, if a business not
in need of graphical interfaces nor audio interfaces. Linux
is not popular with mainstream users.

I suspect Linux will end up following the path of Netscape.
As you know, Netscape was once the most popular of browsers
and remains the best of browsers, but Netscape is no more.
A legit claim to fame by Netscape is forcing Microsoft to
adopt internet industry standards. Nonetheless, MSIE still
sucks, really big time; worst browser ever written.

I do not think Mozilla / Firefox will ever become wildly popular.
Same seems true for Linux.

Recently, I note Windows Vista is a complete flop. Buggy, slow,
bloatware, very problematic. I waited until two years back to
switch from Win98 to WinXP. This WinXP is pretty good, more
secure than Win98 but is a resource hog and slower in some
aspects. Overall, WinXP operates pretty darn good.

Most interesting about XP, over two years, I have not suffered
a "Blue Screen of Death" so common with Win98. There are other
problems but, so far, nothing which takes down an entire system.
My greatest complaint about XP is bundling of worthless software
which pops up advertisements and registration wants, until you
figure out how to remove that worthless bundled software. Well,
this is true when you buy a new machine rather than install
WinXP as sole software.

There is a strong need to keep XP up to date with security patches.

Not a chance I will switch to Vista; too slow, too much bloatware.
Reminds me of Perl 6; slow buggy bloatware.

Linux is a very good system but I think in a few more years
Linux will fall to a legacy software status; there is no
major market for Linux, just as with Perl.

Software like this must be marketed, quite aggressively.
Microsoft is certainly aggressive about marketing. For
this, Microsoft must be given credit due.


--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Purl Gurl wrote:

> I do not think Mozilla / Firefox will ever become wildly popular.
> Same seems true for Linux.

Same seems true for Perl.

I for one am very happy about that. Wildly popular doesn't mean better
software. One could often say that the opposite holds...

I use software because I like how it works. Not because everybody else is
using it.

If I have major issues with it, like you seem to have with Perl, I either
fix it, or look for a better option. Since you seem not to be able to do
the former, I suggest the latter.

--
John

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

John Bokma wrote:

> Purl Gurl wrote:

>> I do not think Mozilla / Firefox will ever become wildly popular.
>> Same seems true for Linux.

> Same seems true for Perl.

I would disagree. Perl is very popular amongst
website administrators. Five to ten years back,
this is not quite so true. However, this rising
demand for customer ability to add programming
to webpages has led to wide usage of Perl to
satisfy this need.

Today, PHP and ASP programming is popular but
Perl remains the most popular, especially having
been installed so early on. Perl does offer a
wider range of abilities and, my opinion, Perl
is easier to program.

This will change as more servers switch over to
Windows servers. Perl usage is declining. This
is well evidenced by the death of Perl discussion
groups here on USENET.

Windows offers greater flexibility and, most
important, Windows offers a greater variety
of solutions to programming needs with ease
of "plug-n-play" technology. Windows also
runs significantly faster than Perl which is
typical of binary builds develop by a company
with good team leadership. Some of this is
simply Microsoft having a much greater ability
to toss money at research and development needs.

A majority, a large majority of servers run Perl
versions prior to the 5.8x version of Perl. Reason
for this is 5.8x and newer, break too many programs
written for earlier Perl versions. This causes many
customers to complain. Breaking prior Perl scripts
by Perl porters, was their first major mistake. Next
major mistake is this failed development of Perl 6.

Even if Perl 6 is released, which looks very doubtful,
not many servers will install this because of so many
radical changes needed to run Perl 6 on a server and
radical changes are needed for customers' programming.
This is a fatal marketing mistake.

The past seven or eight years spent on failed Perl 6
would have been much, significantly much better spent
on continued development of Perl 5.x versions, such
as offering a version which does not break old scripts
and, highly important, offering a Perl "lite" version
for those who want a fast and efficient running Perl.

A Perl 5.x "lite" version would be wildly popular.

Is not this what happened to Stein's Godzilla size
bloatware CGI.pm? Virtually all agree Stein's program
is a horrific work of massive bloatware. This led to
"lite" versions, which is precisely what Perl porters
should be offering to the public; Perl Lite.

Perl porters and Wall were warned many times, very earlier
on, not to develop a Perl 6 version. They did not listen,
did not listen to even the well known experts of this field.


> I for one am very happy about that. Wildly popular doesn't mean better
> software. One could often say that the opposite holds...

Popularity is a reflection of software offering
what the public wants. This is a critical component
of successful marketing. Unix is wildly popular with
administrators. Windows is wildly popular with the
public. Perl is mostly a convenience item offered
to those customers who want some programming.


> If I have major issues with it, like you seem to have with Perl, I either
> fix it, or look for a better option.

Your attitude will not keep Perl alive. Perl is dying,
if not already dead.

You are flaunting how little you know about perl core.
Changes cannot be made, even the slightest change, without
this rippling down through core eventually rendering Perl
some odd variant of Windows 3.1 version. Same is true for
Apache httpd server software. Apache, like Perl, is a maze
of patchwork hobbled together by hundreds of programmers.
No one person can fully understand Apache nor Perl because
of this convoluted spaghetti code found in core programming;
pull on this single string end, a dozen string ends a mile
away begin wiggling around.

Apache made the same mistake with abandoning 1.x versions
and moving into the whistles and bells 2.x versions. Earlier
versions of Apache and Perl are stable and proven. Newer
Apache and Perl are not stable and are buggy bloatware.

Unix, unlike Apache and Perl, has good leadership and has
a well directed plan and direction for future programming.
Unix is ran like a good business and has good marketing.
Those developing Unix are all on the same page and each
is assigned a specific task which blends well with all
other programming. Unix has their act together. Unix has
made very few changes to original core programming.


> Since you seem not to be able to do
> the former, I suggest the latter.

There is your problem and the major problem with
the Perl Community; you are childish and insulting.


--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Purl Gurl wrote:


> There are very many long time well known Perl programmers who
> are shunned and banished by the Perl Community based simply on
> personal like or personal dislike, and for no other reason.


Can you name even one?


> Since you recently began violating the very spirit of USENET,
> what has happened to the perl beginners groups? They are DEAD!


There is no perl beginners group on usenet.


--
Tad McClellan
email: perl -le "print scalar reverse qq/moc.noitatibaher\100cmdat/"

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Purl Gurl wrote:

> Here I am, a seasoned and talented Perl programmer


You delude yourself, which is perfectly OK.

What is objectionable is attempting to delude others.


--
Tad McClellan
email: perl -le "print scalar reverse qq/moc.noitatibaher\100cmdat/"

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

>>>>> "PG" == Purl Gurl writes:

PG> Here I am, a seasoned and talented Perl programmer

can you name a single professional reference who will vouch for your
perl work? do you have a public resume of your perl jobs? we know you
have neither so stop claiming crap like that. you also have no computer
science background nor any knowledge of deep structures, algorithms,
references or anything deeper than simple strings and array. that and
your self delusion doesn't make you seasoned or talented. you never
answer questions beyond the newbie stage since you can't troll the more
experienced hackers here. so please go back on your lockup vacation.

and your response to this will be typicall off topic. just provide ONE
professional independent reference to some perl work where you got
paid. that is the minimum. most everyone else here can do that in an
instant.

uri

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.stemsystems.com
--Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding-
Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Uri Guttman slobbers:

(attributes messed up by Uri)

> ...just provide ONE professional independent reference to some perl
> work where you got paid.

I no longer need to work. Today, our family is filthy rich.
Don't ya wish your family was filthy rich?

We were born to poverty and worked our way to wealth.
This is a notion lost upon you, Uri. You are doomed
to leading a mediocre life.

For readers who are interested, here is an example
of one of my Perl programs,

http://www.purlgurl.net/~stocks

There are lots of my Perl programs out there, on our
home server and elsewhere. I write and give away
Perl programs for free. We do not need the money
and there are people who appreciate free programming.
This is my contribution to the Perl Community.

--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Tad J McClellan wrote:
>Purl Gurl wrote:
>> Here I am, a seasoned and talented Perl programmer
>You delude yourself, which is perfectly OK.
>What is objectionable is attempting to delude others.

Tad, you are really old enough to know better than to feed the resident
troll.

jue

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

>>>>> "PG" == Purl Gurl writes:

PG> Uri Guttman slobbers:
PG> (attributes messed up by Uri)

>> ...just provide ONE professional independent reference to some perl
>> work where you got paid.

PG> I no longer need to work. Today, our family is filthy rich.
PG> Don't ya wish your family was filthy rich?

just show a past job reference then. don't have one i gather. you won't
answer the question.

PG> We were born to poverty and worked our way to wealth.

you are living in a delusion. even if you had money it is wasted upon
your psychotic fantasies. i would rather be poor and know perl than rich
and stupid like you.

PG> For readers who are interested, here is an example
PG> of one of my Perl programs,

PG> http://www.purlgurl.net/~stocks

PG> There are lots of my Perl programs out there, on our
PG> home server and elsewhere. I write and give away
PG> Perl programs for free. We do not need the money
PG> and there are people who appreciate free programming.
PG> This is my contribution to the Perl Community.

hah hah hah!

uri

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.stemsystems.com
--Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding-
Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On 2008-01-03, Purl Gurl wrote:

> I write and give away
> Perl programs for free. We do not need the money
> and there are people who appreciate free programming.
> This is my contribution to the Perl Community.

Your contribution is certainly worth what we've all paid
for it!

--keith

--
kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On Dec 31 2007, 7:20 pm, Purl Gurl wrote:
> I am noting the continued demise of Perl programming.
>
> Participation within this group is down about seventy-five
> percent from traditional historical averages. The new
> "perl.beginners" groups are the verge of extinction.
>
> Of interest to me is the policy of "banishment" by the
> Perl beginners groups. The main group, perl.beginners,
> participation is cut in half and more since a banishment
> policy has been effected. The beginners cgi group is down
> to a near zero participation level.
>
> Perl was once an open source programming language. Today,
> this is not true. Many proficient Perl programmers are no
> longer allowed to participate in discussions of Perl. This,
> of course, does contribute to the demise of Perl programming.

Hi, Purl:

open your eyes please, it's not yesteryear's plain CGI world, with the
surging MVC and Perl templating systems, there is less needs to go
back to the forking-based, single-process, low efficient plain CGI
world.. you should at least check mod_perl/fastcgi or tons of Perl
modules' mailing lists to see how great Perl is today and will be in
the future.. back to 2 years ago when I first checked USENET, I though
you were really knowledgeable and I did learn something from you, but
now you are probably far lagged behind the Perl progresses. wake
up...

lihao

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

lihao0129 wrote:

> Purl Gurl wrote:

(snipped a lot)

>> I am noting the continued demise of Perl programming.

> open your eyes please, it's not yesteryear's plain CGI world, with the
> surging MVC and Perl templating systems, there is less needs to go
> back to the forking-based, single-process, low efficient plain CGI
> world.. you should at least check mod_perl/fastcgi or tons of Perl
> modules' mailing lists to see how great Perl is today and will be in
> the future.. back to 2 years ago when I first checked USENET, I though
> you were really knowledgeable and I did learn something from you, but
> now you are probably far lagged behind the Perl progresses. wake
> up...


Your article borders on being polite. I will respond in kind
and will avoid childish commentary like yours.

You need to learn a lot. Right off I latched onto your comments
about mod perl and fast cgi. You appear to not know much about
this. Those add on programs are good, but this is an adminstration
level task, this requires changes in server configuration, and
requires changes in current scripts on a server. This is a very
difficult task, especially for casual webpage customers who use
"pre-packaged" scripts with little understanding of those scripts
and very little knowledge of Perl.

Your evidence of ignorance on this topic, and ignorance does not
mean stupid rather a lack of knowledge, you display ignorance by
not mentioning implementing those programs is not for the public.
This is strictly a high level server implementation.

You come across as mod perl and fast cgi are for anyone and everyone.
This is not at all true.

You can learn more about mod perl, and this learning applies quite
well to fast cgi, you can learn here and I strongly urge you to
spend a couple of hours reading very carefully,

http://perl.apache.org/docs/1.0/guide/porting.html#Sometimes _it_Works__Sometimes_it_Doesn_t

These are programs for well experienced administrators and
well experienced Perl programmers. These are not programs for
casual usage by the public.

These programs, mod perl and fast cgi, are very good programs.
I fully support usage. However, these are limited to those servers
willing to load those programs, willing to maintain scripts and willing
to have server resources consumed by always running programs. This
is very high level "stuff."

You should be careful about claiming others lack knowledge
while you display a lack of knowledge.

You mention modules. Perl 5 based modules are a good addition.
I do use some select modules and have tested hundreds of modules.
There is no doubt many of these modules I test are modules you
have never heard of. I work with obscure modules which perform
specific tasks which are rarely needed, such as Astro::MoonPhase
which is an excellent module.

Many of us are aware most modules, not all modules, but most
modules are garbage. Many, very many modules are trashed together
simply so an author can claim fame of being listed on CPAN.

My favorite rant is Stein's CGI.pm module. Most know, whether
they will admit or not, his module is more than garbage, his
module is an entire city garbage dump. Popularity is not a
reflection of quality. Have you asked yourself why such a
worthless module is bundled with Perl? Rather stupid, yes?

Modules inherently reduce efficiency. Some modules do afford
ease in programming, are worthwhile, but an efficiency penalty
is almost always paid with module usage.

I will ask you, what is the purpose of the "our" global declaration
within perl core? What relationship does this have with strict?
Is "our" a logical inclusion in perl core? Have Perl porters written
perl core around a module?

You comment on MVC, templates, forking, processes and all
that. Do you think these are offered with an efficiency cost?

With each new release of Perl, core becomes slower, less efficient
and more bloated. Why is this?

Perl 6 is a complete failure.

Are you absolutely certain you are up on new developments
in Perl, up on trends in Perl and trends in usage of Perl?

People today are demanding, are impatient and will not use
software which is slow and bloated. This is Perl, yes?

Personally, I believe you are lagging behind my knowledge
of Perl by a distance of a good ten light-years.

Time for you to wake up, yes?

--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On 2008-01-02 16:32, John Bokma wrote:
> "Peter J. Holzer" wrote:
>> Because Linux is obsolete, too?
>>
>> SCNR,
>> hp
>
>:-D. Let's hope not, I mean I am just about to switch entirely away from
> Windows.

"Linux is obsolete" was the subject of a usenet posting by Andrew
Tanenbaum in 1992. Amongst old-time linuxers it has become a running gag
of sorts.

You can read the posting (and the whole thread) here:
http://www.educ.umu.se/~bjorn/mhonarc-files/obsolete/msg0000 0.html

hp

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On Dec 31 2007, 4:20 pm, Purl Gurl wrote:
> I am noting the continued demise of Perl programming.
>
> Participation within this group is down about seventy-five
> percent from traditional historical averages. The new
> "perl.beginners" groups are the verge of extinction.
>
> Of interest to me is the policy of "banishment" by the
> Perl beginners groups. The main group, perl.beginners,
> participation is cut in half and more since a banishment
> policy has been effected. The beginners cgi group is down
> to a near zero participation level.
>
> Perl was once anopensourceprogramming language. Today,
> this is not true. Many proficient Perl programmers are no
> longer allowed to participate in discussions of Perl. This,
> of course, does contribute to the demise of Perl programming.
>
> Looks to me a select few are converting Perl into a "closedsource"
> programming language, this is, only allowing a select few to
> continue participating in discussions of and development of
> the Perl programming language.
>
> Rather sad to watch a once thriving community of Perl programmers
> degrade into a Good Ol' Boys club which shuns all but a very
> select few.
>
> This banishment policy is the expected outcome of what I have
> noted for years; the Perl Community is a very hostile community.
>
> Couple more years, Perl will be extinct and you select few
> Good Ol' Boys will have Perl all to yourselves, as you intend.
>
> Got Perl 6?
>
> --
> Purl Gurl
> --
> So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
> like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

so much poison, and all over a free language???

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On Jan 3, 6:02 am, sourceview wrote:
> On Dec 31 2007, 4:20 pm, Purl Gurl wrote:
>
>
>
> > I am noting the continued demise of Perl programming.
>
> > Participation within this group is down about seventy-five
> > percent from traditional historical averages. The new
> > "perl.beginners" groups are the verge of extinction.
>
> > Of interest to me is the policy of "banishment" by the
> > Perl beginners groups. The main group, perl.beginners,
> > participation is cut in half and more since a banishment
> > policy has been effected. The beginners cgi group is down
> > to a near zero participation level.
>
> > Perl was once anopensourceprogramming language. Today,
> > this is not true. Many proficient Perl programmers are no
> > longer allowed to participate in discussions of Perl. This,
> > of course, does contribute to the demise of Perl programming.
>
> > Looks to me a select few are converting Perl into a "closedsource"
> > programming language, this is, only allowing a select few to
> > continue participating in discussions of and development of
> > the Perl programming language.
>
> > Rather sad to watch a once thriving community of Perl programmers
> > degrade into a Good Ol' Boys club which shuns all but a very
> > select few.
>
> > This banishment policy is the expected outcome of what I have
> > noted for years; the Perl Community is a very hostile community.
>
> > Couple more years, Perl will be extinct and you select few
> > Good Ol' Boys will have Perl all to yourselves, as you intend.
>
> > Got Perl 6?
>
> > --
> > Purl Gurl
> > --
> > So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
> > like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.
>
> so much poison, and all over a free language???

Yes and it's painfully obvious she has no clue what she is talking
about.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Robert Hicks wrote:

>> Purl Gurl wrote:

(snipped to the point)

>>> I am noting the continued demise of Perl programming.

> Yes and it's painfully obvious she has no clue what she is talking
> about.


Thus far, almost all commentary on this topic coming
out of the Perl Community consists of childish personal
insults. You boys serve well to exemplify and highlight
the Perl Community is a Good Ol' Boys club populated by
poorly educated near illiterates.

In view of this high level of ignorance and significant
evidence of educational lacking amongst those of the
Perl Community, there is no surprise Perl is dying.

--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

"Peter J. Holzer" wrote:

> "Linux is obsolete" was the subject of a usenet posting by Andrew
> Tanenbaum in 1992.

Oh, I am well aware of that. I saw Linus at the University of Utrecht back
in 1994 or so. About the same time I was pondering if it was possible to
port GNU/Linux to the Acorn Archimedes :-D. (Some GNU software already ran
on RISC OS, and I made my first Perl programs on an Acorn Archimedes.

> Amongst old-time linuxers it has become a running gag
> of sorts.

I am afraid that a lot of people who consider it a gag, don't understand
both sides of the argument equally well, but see it as pwnage.

--
John

Arachnids near Coyolillo - part 1
http://johnbokma.com/mexit/2006/05/04/arachnids-coyolillo-1. html

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

Dave Stratford wrote:

> With all due respect, and without in any way either agreeing or
> disagreeing with the statement that Linux is obsolete, can I point out
> that just because something is better than windows, which linux for
> the most part patently is, does not prevent it, linux in this example,
> from being obsolete.

Uhm, you have a point :-).

--
John

Arachnids near Coyolillo - part 1
http://johnbokma.com/mexit/2006/05/04/arachnids-coyolillo-1. html

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On Jan 3, 10:49=A0am, Purl Gurl wrote:
> Robert Hicks wrote:
> >> Purl Gurl wrote:
>
> (snipped to the point)
>
> >>> I am noting the continued demise of Perl programming.
> > Yes and it's painfully obvious she has no clue what she is talking
> > about.
>
> Thus far, almost all commentary on this topic coming
> out of the Perl Community consists of childish personal
> insults. You boys serve well to exemplify and highlight
> the Perl Community is a Good Ol' Boys club populated by
> poorly educated near illiterates.
>
> In view of this high level of ignorance and significant
> evidence of educational lacking amongst those of the
> Perl Community, there is no surprise Perl is dying.
>
> --
> Purl Gurl
> --
> So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
> like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

You are entertaining, I will give you that. Clueless but entertaining.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On Jan 3, 2:56=A0am, Purl Gurl wrote:
> >> I am noting the continued demise of Perl programming.
> > open your eyes please, it's not yesteryear's plain CGI world, with the
> > surging MVC and Perl templating systems, there is less needs to go
> > back to the forking-based, single-process, low efficient plain CGI
> > world.. you should at least check mod_perl/fastcgi or tons of Perl
> > modules' mailing lists to see how great Perl is today and will be in
> > the future.. back to 2 years ago when I first checked USENET, I though
> > you were really knowledgeable and I did learn something from you, but
> > now you are probably far lagged behind the Perl progresses. wake
> > up...
>
> Your article borders on being polite. I will respond in kind
> and will avoid childish commentary like yours.
>
> You need to learn a lot. Right off I latched onto your comments
> about mod perl and fast cgi. You appear to not know much about
> this. Those add on programs are good, but this is an adminstration
> level task, this requires changes in server configuration, and
> requires changes in current scripts on a server. This is a very
> difficult task, especially for casual webpage customers who use
> "pre-packaged" scripts with little understanding of those scripts
> and very little knowledge of Perl.
>
> Your evidence of ignorance on this topic, and ignorance does not
> mean stupid rather a lack of knowledge, you display ignorance by
> not mentioning implementing those programs is not for the public.
> This is strictly a high level server implementation.
>
> You come across as mod perl and fast cgi are for anyone and everyone.
> This is not at all true.
>
> You can learn more about mod perl, and this learning applies quite
> well to fast cgi, you can learn here and I strongly urge you to
> spend a couple of hours reading very carefully,
>
> http://perl.apache.org/docs/1.0/guide/porting.html#Sometimes _it_Works...
>
> These are programs for well experienced administrators and
> well experienced Perl programmers. These are not programs for
> casual usage by the public.

You should really seriously read more contexts of that page before
sending it out._) if you do treat Perl as casual, then that is
probably not a right choice for you anyway..

> These programs, mod perl and fast cgi, are very good programs.
> I fully support usage. However, these are limited to those servers
> willing to load those programs, willing to maintain scripts and willing
> to have server resources consumed by always running programs. This
> is very high level "stuff."
>
> You should be careful about claiming others lack knowledge
> while you display a lack of knowledge.
> You mention modules. Perl 5 based modules are a good addition.
> You comment on MVC, templates, forking, processes and all
> Are you absolutely certain you are up on new developments
> in Perl, up on trends in Perl and trends in usage of Perl?
[..snip..]

don't blind yourself just becouse you dont like something. every
technique is making progress through years, no one will wait for you
and beg you to use any specific language or techninques. the bet is on
you, go to the language that makes the best profit for you and no
whining here around please..

lihao.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

lihao0129 wrote:

> Purl Gurl wrote:

(snipped to make a point)

> no whining here around please..


Would you like some cheese with your whine?

--
Purl Gurl
--
So many are stumped by what slips right off the top of my mind
like a man's bad fitting hairpiece.

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On 2008-01-02, Charlton Wilbur wrote:
>>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma writes:
>
> JB> Purl Gurl wrote:
>
> >> this is the final coffin nail for Perl. This language is
> >> already dead.
>
> JB> So what are you doing here?
>
> Trolling, and she's got her hook firmly implanted in you. Plonk her
> and spare us the noise, please.
>

How do you know this person is female? Seems like an assumption to me.


--

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:22:43 +0100 (CET), Jim Cochrane
wrote:

>> Trolling, and she's got her hook firmly implanted in you. Plonk her
>> and spare us the noise, please.
>>
>
>How do you know this person is female? Seems like an assumption to me.

That's what it constantly claims.


Michele
--
{$_=pack'B8'x25,unpack'A8'x32,$a^=sub{pop^pop}->(map substr
(($a||=join'',map--$|x$_,(unpack'w',unpack'u','G^ ..'KYU;*EVH[.FHF2W+#"\Z*5TI/ER 256),7,249);s/[^\w,]/ /g;$ \=/^J/?$/:"\r";print,redo}#JAPH,

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

>>>>> "JC" == Jim Cochrane writes:

JC> On 2008-01-02, Charlton Wilbur wrote:

>> Trolling, and she's got her hook firmly implanted in you.
>> Plonk her and spare us the noise, please.

JC> How do you know this person is female? Seems like an
JC> assumption to me.

She refers to herself as "gurl" in her nom de net and refers to
herself as a girl from time to time, and I see no reason to doubt it.

It's sufficiently damning to call her what she is; there's no need to
indulge in bizarre gender-related insults to demean her further,
especially as such puerile insults demean the person using them even
more.

Charlton




--
Charlton Wilbur
cwilbur@chromatico.net

Re: Perl - no longer open source and facing extinction

In article ,
John Bokma wrote:
>Dave Stratford wrote:
>
>> With all due respect, and without in any way either agreeing or
>> disagreeing with the statement that Linux is obsolete, can I point out
>> that just because something is better than windows, which linux for
>> the most part patently is, does not prevent it, linux in this example,
>> from being obsolete.
>
>Uhm, you have a point :-).
>
>--
>John
>
>Arachnids near Coyolillo - part 1
>http://johnbokma.com/mexit/2006/05/04/arachnids-coyolillo-1 .html

Solaris?

David