«

I'm going to say it again...there is a whole lot of dogma and
mythology in this group.

Leave out the personal attacks this time and try to have a serious
discussion about it...otherwise you are just degrading Perl......

>m-w.com defines dogma as "something held as an established opinion".
>So in that sense, yes, there's a lot of dogma.

Hi...I always thought of dogma as pretty much a party line...it
doesn't have good connotations....kind of fascist

>That, however, doesn't make it wrong. The dogma in question is the
>result of many years of experience.

Fascist reasoning is to be questioned...that's for sure! Never trust
the party line...

In article <>, hudson wrote:
>>m-w.com defines dogma as "something held as an established opinion".
>>So in that sense, yes, there's a lot of dogma.
>
> Hi...I always thought of dogma as pretty much a party line...it
> doesn't have good connotations....kind of fascist

Granted, that is another accepted definition of dogma.

>>That, however, doesn't make it wrong. The dogma in question is the
>>result of many years of experience.
>
> Fascist reasoning is to be questioned...that's for sure! Never trust
> the party line...

You seem to be missing my point. Just because something is "the party
line" doesn't make it wrong. It doesn't make it right either, but just
because a majority believes something doesn't make them automatically
wrong.

For example, the idea that murder is a Bad Thing (tm) is pretty
generally accepted. Does that mean it's a good thing? No. Granted,
it's an extreme example, but it's still the same idea.

dha

--
David H. Adler - <> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
"Anybody's apt to trip."
"Not over a sofa!" - The Lady Eve

On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 01:31:33 -0700, hudson
<scripts_you_know_the_drill_@hudsonscripting.com > wrote:

>I'm going to say it again...there is a whole lot of dogma and
>mythology in this group.
>
>Leave out the personal attacks this time and try to have a serious
>discussion about it...otherwise you are just degrading Perl......

There is a small clique of comp.lang.perl.misc "clerics" that
like to beat up on nubies and other infidels that don't bow
before them. When they resort to personal attacks, you know
you've got them out of their safe little caves and have them on
the run. Sooner or later they will give you their big "PLONK!",
which is the equivalent of them rolling over like a dog,
urinating on themselves, and then hiding under mommies skirt.
Actually good entertainment.

>>>>> "SB" == Si Ballenger <shb> writes:

SB> There is a small clique of comp.lang.perl.misc "clerics" that
SB> like to beat up on nubies and other infidels that don't bow
SB> before them. When they resort to personal attacks, you know
SB> you've got them out of their safe little caves and have them on
SB> the run. Sooner or later they will give you their big "PLONK!",
SB> which is the equivalent of them rolling over like a dog,
SB> urinating on themselves, and then hiding under mommies skirt.
SB> Actually good entertainment.

and there is the other clique which doesn't care about professional
quality code or being correct or efficiency or good perl in general. you
can choose which side to be on. note that this second clique doesn't
teach perl professionally, doesn't attend or lecture at conferences,
doesn't write articles or tutorials for various publications, doesn't
write/edit/review books, etc. with your choice of the other clique i
would expect you to also get your medical advice from the radio call in
show or your financial advice from spam. both are very user friendly and
won't ever give you practical feedback or criticism.

programming is a career and a living for most (if not all) of the
regulars here. like most professions, experience matters. you want the
lawyer who has done your type of law and successfully, not some kid who
just watched law and order season 3 on dvd. the problem with programming
(and this group) is that that kid can also post answers here and there
is no public way of judging the quality of those answers except via
feedback from others. yet you would claim to use that dvd watching kid
just because he is nicer to you or lets you tell him how to plead your
case. that is a fool hiring a fool. go for it. just don't let me near
your resume.

programming is so easy to get into and make a hobby. it not even hard to
find a job (at least when the market is hot) without massive experience
or degrees. there is a constant discussion over 'certification' in
programming (and perl in particular). would you rather use a CPA or your
cousin who knows how to run quicken to do your taxes?

so stop with your silly lambasting of the regulars here. the regulars
all know and respect each other and notice that we don't flame anyone
for a mistake or feedback or whatever. we all take proper critical
feedback as what it is and not personal attacks. only the weak spirited
and unprofessional take such replies personally. i have no problem with
anyone commenting on the technical aspects of my posts and code. i may
disagree with them and even say so but that is not personal. as they
said in the godfather, it is just business. coding is all about peer
review. code is for people, not computers. but that is too high a
concept for most newbies and amateur coders. i have been coding for 29
years now (24 of those as a paid professional) and i have seen and
written more code than most of you. i am hired for that experience. i
offer it here for free. you can take it or leave it but insulting me for
my technical comments marks you as a fool. and that is a personal
comment on you.

and dave adler's comments on dogma were right on target. the majority
choice is not right or wrong just based on that majority. dogma is bad
when it is not created from free choice. here the use of modules and
cpan is not issued from above and forced upon the perl community. it was
developed over 50 years ago and refined in the greater computer
community. the perl community just has adopted it and refined it even
further with modules and cpan. and there is nothing to stop you from not
using a module. just the voice of experience and reason will say it is a
bad thing and that isn't nice to hear when you think you know it all
(and really don't).

uri

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

>>>>> "h" == hudson <> writes:

h> if you think about it uri, you started this whole mess by calling me a
h> script kiddie and unexperienced when I posted some code and questioned
h> what you said.

so i said that and i still say it. you are a kid. you write
scripts. your code quality (IMNSHO) is of the level of script kiddies
and matt's and other free scripts. you show no professional coding
skills, have no credentials, don't understand bigger issues, so you
look, sound and seem like a script kiddie.

how long have you been coding? how long have you been working in the
computer field? what is the most complex program you have written? have
you ever worked with groups of coders? have you ever written tools or
libraries of code for others?

those are all professional qualifications. you have demonstrated NONE of
them. you have acted childish, petulent, arrogant, among other ways that
do not make you look good.

and again, in my PROFESSIONAL OPINION (i get paid for this all the
time), your code is **** poor. take that as a free code review. it is
NOT an attack on you personally (though you certainly warrant personal
attacks given your behavior here). code review is one of the things this
group does. look at the history of moronzilla (purl gurl among other
nicks). she has always been an isolated loner who preys on newbies and
like a broken clock is right on random occassions. but she always takes
code review as personal and nasty attacks. she has major psychological
problems. even you could detect that from reading her posts. use google
and see. do you want to go down in history as being like her? then stop
this attitude of 'i know best' when you don't. you have no credentials
here so don't act like you do. this is a wakeup call and if you heed it,
one day you make actually thank me for it. but i doubt you will. teens
like you live life like everything is theirs and all attacks are
personal.

you have a chance here to actually grow up by looking inside you and
accepting the fact that you are not a great coder now. you may grow into
one at some time in the future. but your skills are very limited and
narrow. just because you can partially solve a problem like cgi or soap
doens't mean a damned thing. try something harder. try doing it
completely with a clean API and flexible design and full
docuementation. that is what a professional coder strives to do. just
whipping out a short script is what amateurs and kiddies do. amateurs
are fine and i have no problem with learning code that way. but don't
say your code is as good or better than some module written by a pro who
has more coding skill in one finger than you will ever have. i know
lincoln stein and he would laugh at your code (if he was the type that
did such things). he is too nice a guy to say things like that though.

so stop your act. stop posting so much useless stuff. post code, ask
perl questions, discuss perl code and ideas, etc. that is what this
group is for. it is not your personal playpen or amusement park.

will you take that challenge? i hope you do.

uri

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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <>, hudson wrote:
> if you think about it uri, you started this whole mess by calling me a
> script kiddie and unexperienced when I posted some code and questioned
> what you said.

"Mom, hudson's growing!"

It would be considerate of you to not morph your address, so that
those of us with you in our killfiles can continue to enjoy
relative peace and quiet.

- --keith

- --
kkeller-
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/cgi-bin/fom

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAj9EBlgACgkQhVcNCxZ5ID9/kACeJPxJOGkb6EXVFS8H0S1ZKlof
PI8AoJ4EOZ+rc3rJB46onM9vBtDqfDLA
=M6/V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 19:12:31 -0700, hudson <> wrote:
> if you think about it uri, you started this whole mess by calling me a
> script kiddie and unexperienced when I posted some code and questioned
> what you said.

You said you wanted to be killfiled.

Could you stop posting from different fake addresses, so that the killfile
would actually get all of your blatherings.

Thanks.

--
Sam Holden

>>>>> "hudson" == hudson <> writes:
[something]

Please don't use "nobody.com". That's someone else's domain. For
that, we can probably get you an AUP violation from your posting host,
and then you'd be bumped off.

Either use "example.com", because it's permitted, or use something
that's not a valid top-level domain. ".invalid" is recommended, so
something like "" is fair.

I had to go round this with Kira as well. You can be anonymous, just
don't do it by taking over someone else's domain (current or future).

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

if you think about it uri, you started this whole mess by calling me a
script kiddie and unexperienced when I posted some code and questioned
what you said.