nocman

"not large software systems, but programs that process data"

I disagree. Perl still works fine for large systems. I understand why people choose other languages. It depends on what your needs are and what skillset works best for you and those you work with.

Yes, and not just maintenance, new systems.

From what I've gathered, Larry was simply focused on Perl 6 (which became "Raku" in Oct of 2019). It seems to me that he just wanted to let others handle the new development in Perl 5 rather than being directly involved all of the time. I don't think he has done much at all with Perl 5 for quite a long time.

> It is weird OP left Perl 6 out of the story of "what happened to Perl 7". I guess it's just too painful?

Actually, it is not weird when you consider what the article is about. The announcement of Perl 7 was not about Perl 6, it was about Perl 5. Perl 6 had been already been renamed to Raku almost a year prior (Oct '19, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perl). Well, OK, it was about Perl 6 in the sense that newer versions of Perl 5 could not be called Perl 6, but that's about all. Raku/Perl 6 is a related but different language (hence the rename).

I suspect the Perl Steering Council was writing mostly to people who are focused on Perl 5. The announcement about bumping Perl 5 to version 7 created some controversy (centered on what the changes to Perl 5 would be for the bump to version 7). This led to the new governance structure discussed in the article, but it also kind of left people in the Perl 5 community hanging. A lot of them were thinking things like "OK, so are we going to bump to version 7 now, or not?" I think that is what they were trying to address. And anyone who is focused on Perl 5 already knows all about Perl 6/Raku, so there is little reason to bring it up in this article.

Not sure how I missed seeing this before today, but thank you very much for bringing it up. That is a particularly good article. It has a lot of food for thought.

> the anti-Wayland crowd needs to just shut up

I think telling people to shut up is a fast way to shut down valuable discussion. We can have good discussions about the value of particular technologies without being uncivil. Having strong opinions makes it easy to be unkind (especially online). I admit I also struggle with this. I think everyone could dial it down a bit from time to time.

While I see where you are coming from, that's your definition of "burnt out", but it is not the only valid one, and many obviously don't require the condition to be as extreme as you do for the term to be valid.

I don't know anything about Jason, so I can't make an informed call on whether I think he is overly exaggerating things by using the term.

I do think there is at least a version of "burnt out" that just means you are really tired, because you have put a lot of effort into something for a long period of time, to the point that you are questioning whether it is worth it to you to continue doing it.

However, yeah, some people probably say "I'm so burnt out on 'X'" because they've spent over a half hour on it, and it still isn't done. That doesn't qualify, in my opinion.

"But that has an established meaning, namely 1900-1909"

Not to anyone I have ever known. I have never before this post today heard anyone say that "the nineteen hundreds" means 1900-1909. It always refers to 1900-1999.

I've only ever heard of 1900-1909 referred to as "the aughts" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aughts ) - which, admittedly, always sounded weird to me, but I wasn't alive then.

It occurs to me that the root of the problem is that we have competing motivations. On the one side you have the desire to have well documented code, maximizing the benefit to those reading/studying it. On the other side you have the desire to get the most coding done in the least amount of time (something you can push to production, that correctly implements some task or purpose).

Both of these motivations are valid and good. The hard part is knowing at what level of each do we get the best balance of the two.

In one the situation, the "novel" analogy would be appropriate. For instance, I would be very interested in detailed explanations of something like PostgreSQL. A well-written book by someone (or "someones") with intimate knowledge of that code could be tremendously valuable. Here I have in mind something that actually walks through parts of the code, in a literate programming style.

On the other hand, maybe you don't want that much detail, but you still want some understanding of the code in order to do a small task - in that vein, something of the 'car manual' variety would be more appropriate.

I can imagine a full spectrum, from a multi-volume Knuth-like set to something on the order of a single-page cheat sheet. The problem is, it always comes down to how much time do you have to accomplish what you need to accomplish, and how much time will those writing the checks allow you to make informed choices on how things are documented (which, unfortunately, is all too often, ZERO).

Probably just because of the title of the post, this made me think of Terse (terse.com).

Wow, I wonder if Jim Neil really is still selling it (it looks like he is). I wonder if it still comes on an 1.44MB diskette (http://terse.com/neildeal.htm#whatget) :-D

I never used it, nor saw it in use by anyone else. I just remember coming across it multiple times when looking at PC assembly language books and tools.

Cool project, but I gotta have more cowbell!

(seriously, thx for posting this - interesting stuff).

So you are saying Imagemagick is the wrong tool for any job then? (I ask this because the OP didn't reference any particular task). I would disagree with that. Like many media-related command line tools, it does a lot and therefore has a fairly involved command line interface, but I have found it very useful over the years for processing multiple images (and sometimes even just individual ones).

A regex can be difficult to parse, especially if it is very involved, but in Perl at least, there are ways to make it much easier ( using the /x modifier, for example : https://perldoc.perl.org/perlre#%2Fx-and-%2Fxx ). Comments and and having the regex itself be multiline can make things better, especially if you are creating a particularly complicated one.

Damian Conway highly recommends using the combo of 'xms' his Perl Best Practices Book ( https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/perl-best-practices/059... ).

The revised and considerably newer "Modern Perl Best Practices" video series on O'Reilly's learning platform is particularly good also ( https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/modern-perl-best/978149... ) - with lots of discussion of regexes.

I was joking in that response.

"it doesn't trigger people's alarms."

I skipped past the first part of the sentence, because I saw there was a "but" near the end, and supposedly that means the first part of the sentence doesn't count, but now the sentence doesn't make any sense to me.

URL shorteners have been around longer than Twitter. For example, tinyurl.com launched in 2002 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TinyURL). Twitter wasn't until 2006 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter).

People have many reasons they want a shorter URL. Twitter is only one of them.

> However, a lot of times the "want to do it forever" part could be a sign that the candidates doesn't want to learn anything new, which is indeed a very bad sign.

While that is true for a lot of jobs, there are also a fair number of employers that are perfectly content to have an employee that does job X at their company for as long as they are of working age. In the software world it pretty much follows from the fact that the largest chunk of development jobs out there are just CRUD apps and processes that feed them. Many companies do the same things with largely the same software for years and years and years. As long as an employee is getting the work done, many of those employers are thrilled to have a long-term employee doing the same tasks they've been doing for years.

> I think it was a chance to throw shade at Peterson, which is understandable.

I disagree, it was not understandable, it was just a plainly false statement.

According to Jordan's own statements, he went on those medications due to a severe reaction he had to something he ate (not due to his regular diet, but rather something he ate once): https://youtu.be/3ktjZhih3LQ?t=173

And I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessment of him. I don't agree with everything he says (in fact there are a fair number of things we do not see eye-to-eye on). However, he is obviously very intelligent, and unlike a large number of the media he has interacted with he has been decidedly civil in his discourse (even in the face of media figures who were purposefully being unfair and uncivil, trying to score points on him and make him appear to be something that he is not).

And a single setting for someone to change now if they want cua-mode.

My point was that making the default cua-mode won't lead to a significant number of new long-term users, so it isn't worth the hassle it would create for people who are already using it.

Also, emacs is not struggling to stay relevant. I fully expect that it will appeal to an audience of users similar to the one it appeals to today for decades to come.

> I suppose some people manage their apartments with org-mode

I thought I heard someone say "that sounds like a challenge!", but that was probably just my imagination.

Nor should it be, in my opinion.

Emacs has a loyal user base, and changing to having cua-mode as the default would likely anger most, if not all of them. I highly doubt that the number of long-term users gained by the change would be even remotely significant.

I suspect go_prodev is referring to the DDG app ( https://duckduckgo.com/app ) and not just the search engine.

I only recently became aware that the app existed, so I don't know how/if it deals with all things AMP-based.

Yeah, I don't like that this is the default, but "Firefox literally sends your keystrokes to Google" could easily be interpreted by many people to mean all of your keystrokes (not just the ones typed in the URL bar).

It would have been better to say "by default Firefox literally sends every keystroke you type in the URL bar to Google".

In my opinion it is a user-hostile "feature", and should be pointed out, but not in way that could be so wildly misinterpreted.

> It's like complaining that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was funded from profits from Microsoft, and therefore Windows should be FOSS software.

Except that no one confuses Microsoft with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. I'm sure that a lot of people are either unaware of the existence of Raspberry Pi Limited, or don't know the distinction between it and the Raspberry Pi Foundation.

I'm not saying Raspberry Pi Limited should not exist, or should not sell hardware. I'm just saying that it is understandable that some would be unaware of and perhaps surprised its existence and the distinction between it and the Foundation.

Did you reply to the wrong parent? How is this even remotely related to how to transfer files from your phone to another device?

You mean "The artist formerly known as the artist formerly known as Prince"?

:-D

Interesting, I did not remember that it was once called Gaim.

Future Farmers of America:

https://www.ffa.org/about/

That is your interpretation of the original comment, not even close to a direct quote (and I'm sure many would take it as a gross distortion of what was actually said).

Obviously you and I interpreted the original comment very differently.

Maybe it is due to the way people interpret things differently, but none the assessments you are making in your two posts about the original comment are things that I would have said or thought about that comment.