Re^2: Some recent DNA threads

The problem is not unique to Perl, nor to recent history. A few interesting MJD articles:

In the case of these bioinformatics questions, I tend to agree that they're not the result of some highly intellectual researcher who happens to be so frazzled by some problem that he finds himself posting incoherent and poorly-specified problems to PerlMonks. It is far more likely that the undergraduate class BIO239, required as a prerequisite for an associates degree in Medical Records Processing has suddenly added a section on automating genome searches with Perl. The professor enjoys Perl as a hobby, and actually understands some of it, but not well enough to effectively teach non-programmer undergrads how to (a) feel the same passion he has for this hobby, and (b) how to become programmers, and Perl programmers at that, in the course of a few weeks.

Repeat some variation on this theme across a bunch of universities, community colleges, and degree mills throughout the world, and it's not surprising we get a few kooky posts here as a result.

As often as I can, I try to just ignore them and move on. Sometimes they pose interesting problems if you can see through the haze of the poster's misunderstanding of programming and/or the problem domain. In those cases, occasionally I'll take a shot at it just out of curiosity. Sometimes I'm feeling good-natured, and try to encourage the poster to learn how to learn Perl so that he can answer the question himself. And sometimes I fire off some pissy comment, realizing about a half second after clicking 'create' that I shouldn't bother, and really shouldn't lower myself.

I do miss the days when we were frequented by people who just loved Perl because of how cool it is. It may be my imagination, but it seems that it's becoming harder (not only here... just about everywhere) to find the really thought-provoking and interesting posts.

Dave

Comment on Re^2: Some recent DNA threads

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Some recent DNA threads by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Apr 29, 2012 at 16:41 UTC
I do miss the days when we were frequented by people who just loved Perl because of how cool it is. It may be my imagination, but it seems that it's becoming harder (not only here... just about everywhere) to find the really thought-provoking and interesting posts. I miss those times too. Though looking around at a few home nodes, it seems that many of those people still visit this place -- though perhaps less frequently than previously -- but for the most part, they no longer post. It would be interesting to know why that is. With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday' Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. The start of some sanity?	[reply]
Re^4: Some recent DNA threads by Anonymous Monk on Apr 30, 2012 at 21:07 UTC
Are there any greenfield websites, in the Alexa Top 500, created after 2003, that use Perl? Perl 5 has so many forks, PHP, Ruby, Kurila. That is not good.	[reply]
Re^5: Some recent DNA threads by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Apr 30, 2012 at 21:46 UTC
Are there any greenfield websites, in the Alexa Top 500, created after 2003, that use Perl? Quite frankly I neither know nor care. I don't use Perl for web work, so the flavour-du-jour of that (small) part of the programming landscape is of little interest and zero concern. Perl 5 has so many forks, PHP, Ruby, Kurila. That is not good. That statement makes no sense at all. What do you suggest should be done? Maybe we should implore the Doctor to nip back a decade and erase the forkers before they can do their dirty work. He seems to be pretty easy to contact these days, I will never, ever understand why programmers spend so much time worrying themselves about what other programmers prefer. Neither blind obsession with a particular language; nor the current perception of what is fashionable; should ever dictate what language you use for any given project. If your tools do the job you need them to do, use them. If not, investigate alternatives. But choose your tools on the basis of some real criteria -- it effectiveness for the project; the requirements of the employer; it has the prettiest logo -- anything but some half-baked perception of a vox-pop. With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday' Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. The start of some sanity?	[reply]


good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW
	PerlMonks