df@sei.cmu.edu (Dan Farmer) (01/09/91)
Now that the latest version of cops is out, I thought I'd solicit some help from the net again. Lots of people wanted me to rewrite the thing in perl, and I'm willing, with a little help. I've got 3 other people already committed; I figure get 3 or 4 more good coders, and we could get it done in a week without breathing hard. Ok, maybe by Usenix we could ship out a copy. It'll be public domain, etc, etc. Heck, with Randal and Larry, it could probably be done in, oh, let's see, 14 or 15 total modules, that's.... 14-15 lines of code, right? So, volunteers? I'll coordinate the group, we can discuss how to proceed, what ways to improve it, and then whip it off. You'd be responsible for 1 or 2 modules, that's all. Trivial. Future versions of COPS would be available in both perl and the normal shell versions, unless everyone suddenly gets perl (hint, hint.) Heck, someone's probably already done this anyway, right? Just send me the code, and I'll post it for you. If you don't know what cops is, don't bother. (the ever generous) dan df@death.cert.sei.cmu.edu
muir@cae780.csi.com (David Muir Sharnoff) (01/09/91)
In article <26411:Jan900:15:5991@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) flames: >Ya know, wouldn't it be neat if people could use comp.lang.c as >comp.prog.help-wanted.c? I've got lots of great programming projects (in >C, of course) that I want to farm out to people, [etc] Dan, I hate to say it, but from my point-of-view you are detracting from the quality of comp.lang.perl. Comp.lang.perl started out as a mailing list of perl entheusiasts. It retains that flavor to a great extent. I like that flavor and my expectation is that many (if not most) other readers also do. Your comments do have merit in a certain philosophical sense, but I can't go along with your point of view because the things you complain about just aren't real problems for me. For example, your latest complaint is about Dan Farmer's request for cops-coders; his posting had merit because: 1. It was about something interesting - cops; 2. He posted it where it was most likely to get a positive response; 3. I felt that I was part of his intended audience. Comp.lang.perl is the "Perl Users Group". Quit trying to cast it into a mold that doesn't fit. Comp.lang.perl is not comp.lang.c; "perl users" need a very different kind of support that "C users." This stems from several factors: 1. Perl is stilling finding its place in the world; 2. Up until a few days ago, there were no books on how to program; in perl; 3. There are far fewer perl programmers than C programmers; 4. The perl users form a small communinty. Please try to join the signal; you are a major contributor to the noise. (Ya, I know, this article doesn't count as signal either.) -Dave -- David Muir Sharnoff. "RISC is about one year ahead" muir@csi.com (415) 358-3664 (415) 644-0441 Comdisco Systems Inc. 919 East Hillsdale Blvd, Foster City, CA 94404
df@sei.cmu.edu (Dan Farmer) (01/09/91)
In article <foobar> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes: >In article <9920@as0c.sei.cmu.edu> df@sei.cmu.edu (Dan Farmer) writes: >Ya know, wouldn't it be neat if people could use comp.lang.c as >comp.prog.help-wanted.c? I've got lots of great programming projects (in >C, of course) that I want to farm out to people, and I think a language >newsgroup is the right place to advertise. Better yet: I've got an >improved PD clone of ``man'' written in C. I think I'll post it to >comp.lang.c, because anyone who cares about the C language must care >about any program written in C. Just for the record, it doesn't really matter much to me if cops is in perl or cobol or sanscrit; it works just fine the way it is in shell and miscellaneous stuff, but the fact is, people like perl, want applications in perl, and are interested in seeing certain programs written in the thing. If you've got a problem with any post in this group, you can either hit the "n" key, start up a kill file, e-mail to the offender, or post to the entire world flaming about how horrible it is. If your so terribly concerned about the content in this group, why don't you make a proposal to split it into other groups? Change the names? Do whatever, instead of complaining about people being interested enough to have fun with the language. You seem to be against anyone talking about anything that *you* want to hear about. As a matter of fact, I think of all the postings to this group, *yours* have been the most consitant -- consistant in that they having nothing to do with perl than any other articles I've seen. >Just as things having nothing to do with the TeX language >per se are fair game for TeXHAX, most of the postings currently crammed >into comp.lang.perl would find a new home in a PUG mailing list. And what exactly would you like to see here? Where would the appropriate place to post news of a program that people have been asking for, pray tell, mr. protocal? Personally, I'd say that a program or idea that uses perl as a language is more than fair game to post about in the perl language group, until there is a time that you create comp.lang.perl.d or, in your case, a more appropritate group, alt.perl.flame. Flames welcome, as are other volunteers. dan
fwp1@CC.MsState.Edu (Frank Peters) (01/10/91)
In article <26411:Jan900:15:5991@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
Ya know, wouldn't it be neat if people could use comp.lang.c as
comp.prog.help-wanted.c? I've got lots of great programming projects (in
C, of course) that I want to farm out to people, and I think a language
newsgroup is the right place to advertise. Better yet: I've got an
improved PD clone of ``man'' written in C. I think I'll post it to
comp.lang.c, because anyone who cares about the C language must care
about any program written in C.
I agree that the flavor of comp.lang.perl is different from other
comp.lang groups. But I think there are important differences to perl
(at this point in time) that make those differences necessary.
1) Almost all of the users of comp.lang.{c,lisp,pascal} already know
the language under discussion fairly well. The perl group (in my
subjective opinion) seems to have a larger percentage of people who
don't know the language or are very new to it. Because of this I
think a higher rate of sample programs is appropriate here where it
wouldn't be in another group. As the percentage of experienced perl
programmers increases I expect the basic stuff to become less common.
Also, I gather that several readers aren't really sure they want
anything to do with perl. They've heard of the language and
subscribed to learn more about it (in the sense of "what can it do for
me" rather than "how can I write programs in it"). For these people a
demonstration that perl can be used to write an enhanced man package
is of interest (I was in this category when I first subscribed).
C doesn't have nearly as much questioning of its basic usefulness.
2) Other languages usually have a variety of books to which users can
go for simple examples and explanations. There is no such reference
for perl beyond the man pages (well...there is a book now but
practically speaking nobody has access to it yet). A great many of
the otherwise trivial code posted here illustrates The Perl Way (doing
s search this way is more efficient than doing it that way). Such
things are found in books for other languages.
3) Most of the C programmers on the net probably don't read
comp.lang.c (it is too high volume for the casual reader). And most
of the readers of the *.sources.wanted groups (an ordinarily more
appropriate place for programmers wanted requests) probably do know C.
But most probably don't (yet) know perl and most of the perl
programmers on the net probably do read comp.lang.perl at this point.
This means that posting a request for C programmers in comp.lang.c is
inefficient and misses much of its potential audience.
But a posting for perl programmers in this group is a very efficient
choice. It gets most of the people he wants to reach and minimizes
the number of people who don't know perl and have to skip on over the
posting.
So I think you need to allow for a different flavor in this group
because of the (relative) newness of the language under discussion and
the lack of outside references. As perl becomes more popular and
ubiquitous and as The Book gets out and accessible I expect that the
flavor of the group will change somewhat...but right now its traffic is
just about perfect for the language as it is today.
FWP
--
--
Frank Peters Internet: fwp1@CC.MsState.Edu Bitnet: FWP1@MsState
Phone: (601)325-2942 FAX: (601)325-8921allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR) (01/10/91)
As quoted from <26411:Jan900:15:5991@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> by brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein): +--------------- | In article <9920@as0c.sei.cmu.edu> df@sei.cmu.edu (Dan Farmer) writes: | > Now that the latest version of cops is out, I thought I'd solicit some | > help from the net again. Lots of people wanted me to rewrite the thing | > in perl, and I'm willing, with a little help. | | Ya know, wouldn't it be neat if people could use comp.lang.c as | comp.prog.help-wanted.c? I've got lots of great programming projects (in | C, of course) that I want to farm out to people, and I think a language | newsgroup is the right place to advertise. Better yet: I've got an | improved PD clone of ``man'' written in C. I think I'll post it to | comp.lang.c, because anyone who cares about the C language must care | about any program written in C. +--------------- Show me the excessive volume in this newsgroup to justify a separate newsgroup for applications vs. language issues, or a sources group, etc. (Hint: we got only 6 articles for this newsgroup today.) It looks to me like there's no real justification for this particular issue. Chill out, okay? ++Brandon -- Me: Brandon S. Allbery VHF/UHF: KB8JRR on 220, 2m, 440 Internet: allbery@NCoast.ORG Packet: KB8JRR @ WA8BXN America OnLine: KB8JRR AMPR: KB8JRR.AmPR.ORG [44.70.4.88] uunet!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery Delphi: ALLBERY
brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) (01/10/91)
In article <11230@cae780.csi.com> muir@cae780.csi.com (David Muir Sharnoff) writes: > Comp.lang.perl is the "Perl Users Group". Yes, that's exactly what I was saying before! I really do think that ``The Perl Users Group'' would be a much, much better name than ``comp.lang.perl'' to attract new people to the Perl community, and to describe the sort of discussions that go on within that community. The problem is that setting up a users group demands time and energy. I think Tom is the obvious choice for organizer, though of course he may not realize how much effort he's already putting in. Someday it may be useful to create comp.lang.perl, a newsgroup for discussions of Perl as a language. But the point of my article was that what I see here is a users group, and that this group should be given a more appropriate name and made into the organization people want. ---Dan
brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) (01/10/91)
In article <9926@as0c.sei.cmu.edu> df@sei.cmu.edu (Dan Farmer) writes: > If your so terribly > concerned about the content in this group, why don't you make a proposal > to split it into other groups? Change the names? Do whatever, instead > of complaining about people being interested enough to have fun with the > language. I made my proposal, for the Perl Users Group. Look around. Can't you see a users group here? Can't you see that ``The Perl language'' hardly describes the variety of activities that go on within this group? People don't *want* a comp.lang.perl. People *want* a Perl Users Group. > As a matter of fact, I think of all the postings to > this group, *yours* have been the most consitant -- consistant in that > they having nothing to do with perl than any other articles I've seen. Actually, I've posted about 25 articles to this group, all *direct* followups to previous articles. By my latest count, 7 were technical and had to do with Perl directly, 9 more were technical but were in threads that had nothing to do with Perl, 8 more were non-technical meta-Perl discussions, and 1 was a pure flame (which, despite all my intentions, at least three people extracted useful information from). Yesterday Tom decided to package up an archive of all of the above and send it to me, supposedly to prove that most of my articles were non-technical and ``obstructive.'' When I pointed out that most of my articles here were on technical issues, he counted, realized I was right, and told me to fuck off. How pleasant. > >Just as things having nothing to do with the TeX language > >per se are fair game for TeXHAX, most of the postings currently crammed > >into comp.lang.perl would find a new home in a PUG mailing list. > And what exactly would you like to see here? I'd certainly be interested in a new group called comp.lang.perl, for discussions of Perl as a language per se. I'm also interested in applications of Perl to various problem areas, but there are already source groups meant to handle such traffic. > Where would the appropriate > place to post news of a program that people have been asking for, pray tell, There isn't any good place, other than the source groups. I've been complaining for a while about the lack of a general programming hierarchy; it's a shame that there isn't a comp.prog.help-wanted group, for example. > Personally, I'd say that a program or idea that uses perl as > a language is more than fair game to post about in the perl language group, By the same token, a program or idea that uses C as a language is more than fair game to post about in the C language group. Look, folks, perl is not that new any more. There are fewer Perl wizards than C wizards, but there are enough people familiar with the language to answer simple questions about it. Perl novices need help---but so do C novices, and they learn to find code in the source groups. Production code simply doesn't belong in a language group. On the flip side, there do seem to be enough people who *do* want to see not only the language but code that uses the language. These people want a users group, not a language group. ---Dan
tytso@athena.mit.edu (Theodore Ts'o) (01/10/91)
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) Date: 9 Jan 91 23:34:38 GMT Yes, that's exactly what I was saying before! I really do think that ``The Perl Users Group'' would be a much, much better name than ``comp.lang.perl'' to attract new people to the Perl community..... I've got news for you: do you know how I read this mailing list? It comes to me in the following form: |Subject: Perl-Users Digest #436 |From: Digestifier <Perl-Users-Request@virginia.edu> |To: Perl-Users@virginia.edu |Reply-To: Perl-Users@virginia.edu | |Date: Thu, 18 Oct 90 16:14:52 EDT | |Perl-Users Digest #436, Volume #1 Thu, 18 Oct 90 16:14:52 EDT This mailing list started as a the "Perl Users mailing list". Then when it got widely popular, it got gatewayed to Usenet. Someone picked the name comp.lang.perl. If you want to change the name of the Usenet group on the other end of the Mail/News gateway to something stupid like comp.perl.users.group, go ahead and post the proposal to news.groups and stop wasting bandwith here. Personally, I think it doesn't matter what we call it in Usenet land --- with the possible exception of Dan Berstein, we all understand what sort of mailing list/group this is and what we expect out of it. And with the possible exception of Dan Berstein, we're all more or less happy with it. (Except that I'm getting tired of these endless arguments about what is and is not acceptable in this group.) Now. Can we please stop the meta-postings? - Ted
brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) (01/11/91)
In article <1991Jan10.022359.1006@uvaarpa.Virginia.EDU> tytso@athena.mit.edu writes: > Now. Can we please stop the meta-postings? Okay. It's pretty obvious now that the current readership is happy with the name, so I'll stop complaining about it. I just hope there aren't too many new users out there who haven't found the group. (It would be nice, though, if people would post just introductions and pointers to large sources. Please?) ---Dan
roy@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail) (01/11/91)
#! /usr/lib/perl
# Ob Perl content:
while <DATA> {
last if /^--/;
print;
}
__END__
Let's look back a bit, shall we?
brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>In article <1991Jan9.015034.13077@uvaarpa.Virginia.EDU> eichin@athena.mit.edu writes:
>> 1) Is *anybody* other than Mr. Bernstein upset with the
>> plethora of examples of perl code that appear in comp.lang.perl?
>
>If not, I'll stop complaining about it.
And later, in another article...
> People don't *want* a comp.lang.perl. People *want* a Perl Users Group.
and...
> These people want a users group, not a language group.
Well, Dan, it seems that, indeed, you are the only one upset. I ask that
you follow your own advice and quit complaining.
In case it has escaped your attention, _I_ am one of these "people" to
whom you ascribe the desire for a "users group, not a language group."
But who are you to put words in my mouth? I like the current flavor of
comp.lang.perl just fine. It meets my needs and desires. It's informal,
friendly and diverse... much like Perl itself.
It would seem that you desire some form of authority over this
newsgroup. I say FOO! If you don't like it, unsubscribe. But _please_
stop wasting bandwidth whining about it. If you must post, contribute to
the discussion of Perl and its uses. If you want so badly to moderate a
newsgroup, propose one. But if all you can do is complain, take it to
alt.flame (which my system does not take), so we can ignore it and get
on with learning and sharing Perl.
--
Roy M. Silvernail -- roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu - OR- cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu
Department of redundancy department, or "Take the long way home...":
main(){system("perl -e '$x = 1/50; print \"Still just my \\$$x!\n\"'");}
[new year, new .sig, same ol' cyberspace]brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) (01/14/91)
In article <1BDLV1w163w@cybrspc> cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail) writes: > Let's look back a bit, shall we? [ ... ] > Well, Dan, it seems that, indeed, you are the only one upset. I ask that > you follow your own advice and quit complaining. I did. <20443:Jan1017:34:1691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> was at UMN hours before you posted your article. ---Dan