in reply to Re: NodeReaper out of control
in thread NodeReaper out of control

I posted an idea about changing abs to || in Perl::Improved Volume 0, Number 1. Aristotle viciously attacked it in his desperate attempt to draw attention away from his ignoring the guidelines for considering/reaping nodes. sporty even called me an idiot for that idea. I believe I explained myself sufficiently in response, explaining more than once how parentheses were a reasonable solution to the points some people raised. I got downvoted, and I'd be willing to bet that Sporty and Aristotle weren't. Were they?
I called you an idiot because you refuse to learn from what people tell you. You were told it won't work, and yet again, you ignore what people say, with proof. *I* gave you an text books by established computer scientists explaining the situation, ambiguity. Plus, you changed your argument mid stride by saying, "you meant to recommend parrens". Had you said that the first time, the discussion would have taken a DRASTICLY different form... explaining that |'s chars would be superfulous... or something.

If you believe i was in err and votes mean so much, please, downvote my nodes and find out that i'm a terrible person and smite me at the same time, by downvoting those nodes.

You really need to realize, you try impose change or create a solution and expect people to jump all over it as if it were gold. If people tell you somethign isn't "good" due to reasons, you need to listen or properly refute them. You can't force people to switch from abs(...) to (|....|) w/o talking about it and figuring out if you really right or wrong. Unless you've written perl (not Perl), or have written patches against it, it could be a long shot, a complete trouble, to write that part to be the new abs, but it won't work. Point of all this jibber jabber is, you dont' want to work WITH people, just in your own little world, forgetting that this is a community.

Btw, you wanna see something that created change? Look at my node about passwords being repopulated in the user form. I argueed it, people disagreed, agered and veered off into no-where, like a herd of kittens, but all in all, MANY people agreed. They agreed on somethign that was a major concern. And fulfilling that concern didn't affect those who didn' thave the concern. THAT is how you can create change. Plausible argument, and some proportion of people agreeing. /rant

Then B.I. said, "Hov' remind yourself nobody built like you, you designed yourself"

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: NodeReaper out of control
by ysth (Canon) on Sep 20, 2004 at 18:30 UTC
    WADR, the ambiguity argument is garbage. AFAIK, all useful languages have ambiguities; as long as they are resolved in a clear way there's no problem. Perl certainly has more than its fair share, and not all of those are at all clearly resolved (e.g. /$x[foo]/: is it a scalar and a character class, or an array element? Depends on what foo is, and the guessing code is complex beyond description.)

    Update: just for fun, here is the code that disambiguates $x[foo] in a regex. FALSE means a character class; TRUE means a subscript. s points to foo.

A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.