http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:40, Dave Hodgkinson daveh...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
Key is
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/#comment-90218
P
On 20 April 2011 10:03, Paul Makepeace pa...@paulm.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:40, Dave Hodgkinson daveh...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
Key is
On 20/04/2011 09:40, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
Or does he have a point?
He completely has a point. CPAN developers right now seem to have a strong
predilection for throwing the kitchen sink into modules that really don't need
it. (You want to parse dates, you use DateTime. Um, no, not necessarily.)
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:40:57AM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
He has a point.
--
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Simon Cozens si...@simon-cozens.orgwrote:
On 20/04/2011 09:40, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
Or does he have a point?
He completely has a point. CPAN developers right now seem to have a strong
predilection for throwing the kitchen sink into modules that really
On 20 Apr 2011, at 11:05, Simon Cozens wrote:
I agree with him that doesn't seem to be a culture of simplicity.
Yup - completely agree. This is one of the reasons I like the ::Tiny namespace
so much.
And the transient dependency explosion - and subsequent burden of updating
those dependencies
On 20/04/2011 11:42, Zbigniew Lukasiak wrote:
The alternative to having one big, but mostly universal module (like
DateTime) is to have many small specialized modules.
No, the alternative is to have the option of either using one big universal
module *or* many small specialized modules. A
On 20 April 2011 11:13, Jesse Vincent je...@fsck.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:40:57AM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
He has a point.
Gosh that's timely: my talk last week at
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:42:12PM +0200, Zbigniew Lukasiak wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Simon Cozens si...@simon-cozens.orgwrote:
On 20/04/2011 09:40, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
Or does he have a point?
He completely has a point. CPAN developers right now seem to have a strong
On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 11:48 +0100, Andy Armstrong wrote:
Yup - completely agree. This is one of the reasons I like the ::Tiny
namespace so much.
And the transient dependency explosion - and subsequent burden of updating
those dependencies - i.e. the TCO of a Perl app - is the main reason
On 20 April 2011 11:59, Peter Edwards pe...@dragonstaff.co.uk wrote:
Go ahead and write CPAN modules requiring perl 5.12 and up to date Moose
then watch organisations throw Perl out the window and replace it with Java.
Like I'm seeing right now because they end up stuck requiring particular
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:06:27PM +0100, Bill Crawford wrote:
On 20 April 2011 11:59, Peter Edwards pe...@dragonstaff.co.uk wrote:
Go ahead and write CPAN modules requiring perl 5.12 and up to date Moose
then watch organisations throw Perl out the window and replace it with Java.
Like
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 01:01:10PM +0200, Abigail wrote:
I think his point is: when doing something trivial, don't have a huge
dependency chain.
And it's to highlight this that I wrote CPANdeps!
--
David Cantrell | Bourgeois reactionary pig
There's a hole in my bucket, dear Liza, dear
On 20 April 2011 11:42, Zbigniew Lukasiak zzb...@gmail.com wrote:
I generally agree that bloat happens and perhaps we should think a bit more
about that - but I don't think there are any simple solutions.
The alternative to having one big, but mostly universal module (like
DateTime) is to
On 20 April 2011 12:12, Abigail abig...@abigail.be wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:06:27PM +0100, Bill Crawford wrote:
It is frustrating to try to get a recent version of anything at all
onto a server that's destined to sit in a data centre for five years,
and needs to have a relatively
On 20 Apr 2011, at 12:05, Jason Clifford wrote:
So how are you handling the requirement to maintain the code doing what
those many modules do?
If you are not using a modular approach does that have any impact upon
the TCO of maintaining the systems you are deploying?
Short answer: we're
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Andy Armstrong a...@hexten.net wrote:
On 20 Apr 2011, at 12:05, Jason Clifford wrote:
So how are you handling the requirement to maintain the code doing what
those many modules do?
If you are not using a modular approach does that have any impact upon
the
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:22, Bill Crawford billcrawford1...@gmail.com wrote:
If (as recently happened) you discover a dependency chain that leads
to CPAN complaining that you need a newer perl because it's a core
module ... it gets extra annoying.
+1
cpan[1] install Term::ReadLine
The most
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:21:02PM +0100, Dominic Thoreau wrote:
i did see the counterpoint to this a while back when putting in a
module to CPAN for $past_employer.
Not so much huge dependency chain as there's more than one way to
do it being a problem.
This is why I don't like Catalyst.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:22:20PM +0100, Bill Crawford wrote:
If (as recently happened) you discover a dependency chain that leads
to CPAN complaining that you need a newer perl because it's a core
module ... it gets extra annoying.
That particular bug was fixed a squillion years ago.
--
On 20/04/2011 11:59, Peter Edwards wrote:
Go ahead and write CPAN modules requiring perl 5.12 and up to date Moose
then watch organisations throw Perl out the window and replace it with Java.
Given that a lot of the push behind the Modern Perl cult is to make Perl more
Serious and Enterprise, I
On 20 April 2011 14:18, Simon Cozens si...@simon-cozens.org wrote:
On 20/04/2011 11:59, Peter Edwards wrote:
Go ahead and write CPAN modules requiring perl 5.12 and up to date Moose
then watch organisations throw Perl out the window and replace it with Java.
Is there anything better in Java?
On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 12:27 +0100, Andy Armstrong wrote:
Short answer: we're writing most of our new services in Java with a toolchain
that makes a lot of dependency management problems go away :)
Does that mean your java team will have to re-invent lots of wheels or
will they be using
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 15:40, Jason Clifford ja...@ukfsn.org wrote:
Does that mean your java team will have to re-invent lots of wheels or
will they be using established (and proven) code libraries?
They'll probably be using software that doesn't contain a load of
'0.x' releases
/snark
On 20/04/2011 13:29, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:22, Bill Crawfordbillcrawford1...@gmail.com wrote:
If (as recently happened) you discover a dependency chain that leads
to CPAN complaining that you need a newer perl because it's a core
module ... it gets extra annoying.
On 04/20/2011 04:48 PM, Jacqui Caren-home wrote:
p.s. how about listing the depcount for a module.
That way we can tell what is truly lite and what is a can-o-worms.
You mean like cpandeps does?
http://deps.cpantesters.org/
Dave...
On 20 April 2011 17:48, Jacqui Caren-home jacqui.ca...@ntlworld.com wrote:
p.s. how about listing the depcount for a module.
That way we can tell what is truly lite and what is a can-o-worms.
something like this
http://deps.cpantesters.org/?module=DateTimeperl=latest ? Granted, it
would be
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Dave Hodgkinson daveh...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
No, code reuse is a *good* thing.
Yes, CPAN.pm sometimes fails.
Yes, TMTOWTDI means you have to make educated
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 06:43:48PM +0200, Lars Thegler wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Dave Hodgkinson daveh...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
No, code reuse is a *good* thing.
Sometimes.
On 20 Apr 2011, at 09:40, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
He might or might not have a point. The truth is, as someone working in a Java
shop where the core business is writing games, as long as
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 18:01, Abigail abig...@abigail.be wrote:
But I've seen so much code that's needlessly convulated just so it can
just some code (or worse, that the code can be reused)
I think they came up with a term for this back in the '70s: Object
Oriented Programming.
Paul
PS
On 20 April 2011 18:45, Pedro Figueiredo m...@pedrofigueiredo.org wrote:
On 20 Apr 2011, at 09:40, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
He might or might not have a point. The truth is, as someone
On 20 Apr 2011, at 19:08, Joel Bernstein wrote:
On 20 April 2011 18:45, Pedro Figueiredo m...@pedrofigueiredo.org wrote:
He might or might not have a point. The truth is, as someone working in a
Java shop where the core business is writing games, as long as this happens
whenever we need a
Abigail wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 06:43:48PM +0200, Lars Thegler wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Dave Hodgkinsondaveh...@gmail.com wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
No, code reuse is a
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 07:08:03PM +0100, Joel Bernstein wrote:
On 20 April 2011 18:45, Pedro Figueiredo m...@pedrofigueiredo.org wrote:
On 20 Apr 2011, at 09:40, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:40:57AM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
He's embarrassed that didn't think to run apt-get install libnet-twitter-perl?
On 20 April 2011 20:51, Abigail abig...@abigail.be wrote:
I've been trying to tell people for many, many years that this is a good
way to deliver applications, but Perl programmers seem to be stuck in the
60s; and the mere thought of having two copies of a text file takes too
much costly
On 20 April 2011 22:53, Walt Mankowski walt...@pobox.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:40:57AM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
He's embarrassed that didn't think to run apt-get
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 05:53:20PM -0400, Walt Mankowski wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:40:57AM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
http://www.jwz.org/blog/2011/04/a-badge-for-the-software-industrys-failures/
Or does he have a point?
He's embarrassed that didn't think to run apt-get
40 matches
Mail list logo