[Gllug] Web Site Creation

[Nix]

On Sat, 5 Nov 2005, Aaron Trevena whispered secretively:
> On 11/4/05, Nix <nix at esperi.org.uk> wrote:
>> `Rabid'? I dislike it *and I use it* --- the language is horrible,
>> but the library is not, and for a lot of practical tasks the library
>> dominates.
> 
> Sorry - with all the talk of pulling out fingernails or slow boiling
> your innards in preference instead, I guessed you and tethys would
> rather starve on the streets than use it ;)

Tet that might apply to. I do a lot of small jobs in /bin/sh, but
anything involving complex data manipulation where scsh is not
available, and anything involving stuff which CPAN can do for me,
I use Perl for.

I just wince as I do it.

>> > Any decent programmer or sysadmin can do their job very well using
>> > perl,
>>
>> What, regardless of the job? *boggle*
> 
> Right - I was naively thinking that if you paid somebody the right
> ammount and provided the basic requirements - they would do a decent
> job. Perl meets at least basic requirements for most common or garden
> development work - I wouldn't suggest you write the next air traffic
> control system in perl 5 (maybe perl 6) or Quake 11 or whatever with
> it either.

Ah. We're in violent agreement then. (The worrying thing is financial
systems: I found out what the core of the CREST settlement system's
server-side software was written in the other month and it horrified
me.)

> But the initial thread, if you look at the subject was TT for
> websites, and if you can put together a half way decent website using
> ASP (not very nice experience but entirely possible if you are a
> professional), then it is a pleasure in Perl.

Agreed. At work we're using the whole J2EE palaver, and it is most
thoroughly unpleasant. I can't think of many languages less suitable
than Java for webbish stuff :/

>> > lisp which it would be unreasonable to expect people to use in a
>> > professional environment.
>>
>> So you should reject languages because they are `oddities'? What's an
>> `oddity'? A language you have an irrational prejudice against?
> 
> It isn't irrational - I use lisp in emacs, although when I think about
> it I have no idea where the hell else it used on any day to day basis
> - any big business or important industry use it? Don't think so. What

I guess Yahoo and Google aren't important?

> about a killer app that would make me consider it for a similar task

Well, *I* find scsh and sawfish pretty killer :)

> -- nope! What about suggesting using it in place of something anybody
> else in the office has heard of -- hardly.

There aren't any Lisp-based spreadsheets worthy of the name, no. But
then perhaps that's because writing spreadsheet apps is sodding boring
and most Lisp hackers have better things to do.

>> (And *again* we see this `in a professional environment' canard trotted
>> out. What's so special about them?)
> 
> A professonial environment is where people pay you and both your
> livelihoods depend on it's success.

Again, why the hell does the fact that you're getting paid matter a
damn with regard to whether a programming language is any good?

I get paid for some of what I do and not for the rest. The stuff I don't
get paid for is a hell of a lot better written, becuase I don't have so
many stupid arbitrary constraints (many, but not all, of the `you must
use {buzzword-compliant language} selected at random by a committee of
half-trained chimps' variety).

>                                     Of course life sucks, so many
> projects fail with no impact on anything, and we all know that there
> are 'professional' developers who are clearly unprofessional. Don't
> blame the language if you have to work with their crap.

Er, you're the one saying that something about one particular language
makes it ideal for `professional' environments and that *this somehow
reflects well upon the language*.

>> (Oh, and you keep misspelling the name of the language. It's Perl,
>> not perl.)
> 
> It's my bitch, I have the t-shirt, I've written modules and do it for
> a living - I could be talking about the compiler, the community or the
> language so sticking to all lowercase is fine. Using all CAPS is
> mispelling it.

Oh hell yes. Likewise the people who refer to LINUX, *shudder*. A lot
of people have yet to learn that not every neologism is an acronym :(

>> Ah! So a `professional environment' is one where you must kludge stuff
>> up with poor tools because they're all that is available for political
>> reasons.
> 
> Not necessarily kludge - if it does the job, is maintainable,
> documented, and reliable, etc then it's a professional job - the fact

OK, that's already very unlike most of the places where I've worked, where
maintainable, documented *and* reliable go by the board in the pursuit of
out-of-the-door-to-meet-the-deadline.

> the client made some dumb decisions (whether about the technology,
> project management, team, price, schedule, colour, market,
> functionality) doesn't make it any less professional. Coping with that
> and earning your keep is what makes you professional in my eyes.

You'll note that this has nothing whatsoever to do with the technical
qualities of *any* language. So why did you drag it into a discussion
of the utility or nastiness of Perl?

>> I hate to say it, but the only irrational hatred I see a sign of here is
>> coming from you. The rest of us are saying `Perl is pig-ugly but useful,
>> but other things may often be more suitable'. *That* is a pragmatic
>> judgement. What you're saying comes across as `Perl is the One True Way,
>> all Perl, everywhere, all the time, someone who doesn't know how to
>> write it is nearly useless'. This is rubbish.
> 
> Hang - 'by rest of us' that is you and nix, unless you want to

er, the `you' in there *is* Nix. Me and me? ;)

> for courses, I wouldn't complain but trotting out crap about lack of
> maintainability and poking out your eyes in preference is hardly
> pragmatic or diplomatic - it comes accross as rabid and
> unprofessional.

Er, so saying that it is especially easy to turn out crap in Perl is
`rabid and unprofessional'? Regardless of its degree of truth? i.e.,
you dislike learning from experience? Fascinating.


And oh look that word's popped up again. You really do load every
imaginable meaning onto it, don't you? I'm thinking of sticking a filter
in my newsreader that replaces `unprofessional' with `I don't like it'
for all your posts: I don't think their actual meaning would change a
jot.)

> Perl isn't the best tool for everything but it is bloody good at most
> programming jobs outside of Games and GUI driven stuff.

... and anything to do with manipulation of complex data structures,
where its appalling paucity of datatypes shoots it in the head.

Alas an awful lot of programming consists of manipulation of complex
data structures. I'd venture to say most of it does.

> Actually I rather like C# and C++ as well as perl, smalltalk was
> interesting but I never had a chance to use it in anger, and daily I

Smalltalk's biggest problem was the inability to prove *anything*
worth mentioning at compile time; this did tend to make it easy to
miss bugs. (Objective C has some of the same failings.)

-- 
`Heinlein is quite competent at putting together sentences, but usually
he also puts together a plot to go with them.' --- Russ Allbery
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug