Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from November 1999
>Do not "be silent" me. Very well, then explain then what useful purpose is served by your irrepressible desire to hurl insults at Perl as being "not a real programming language". >> and offer patches on the second one. >Are you infering that I do not? And given the treatement my doc >patches get, whey should I? (Note for non-native speaker: imply and infer, like teach and learn, differ in their direction, and are never interchangeable. You meant implying, not inferring.) I am implying nothing. I am stating that your insults on the Perl documentation lead to no positive effect. And frankly, I in complete honesty cannot recall a recent instance in which you submitted a corrective or explanatory documentation patch against existing material, particularly one that was rejected, let alone one that was rejected without cause. Maybe my memory is selective, but perhaps you should try harder. If you invested as much energy in fixing instead of bitching, you'd put yourself out of the job of bitching. Or do you really enjoy that job overmuch? >> well. The answer is that Perl's printf function is directly descended >> >from C's function by the same name, and whensoever this should not prove >> onerous, behaviours should follow accordingly. >I see. So one needs to apply guesswork to understand what "proves >onerous" and what not. This is going nowhere. Is that your goal? Congratulations, you're succeeding. I'll take a patch over a bitch any day of the week. Feel free to send us more mail about this as soon as you have a constructive documentation patch to offer. But before that, I can't see that you've got much to add that's contributory rather than inflammatory. >You see, all your answers show that Perl is a good scripting language, There you go again with that "not a real programming language crap". Do you also subscribe to women's rights mailing lists and bombast them with mysogynist tirades? That would go over about as well as showing up to a programming language's developer mailing list and telling them that they aren't even good enough to be called a programming language. That's nonsense. Even were it true -- and it is demonstrably a viscious and seditious lie -- it has no business being said in that forum. --tom