I was searching for a library in Ruby which I wasn't sure existed, and
sometimes I'll go looking to see if Perl has something. (And when
doesn't it?) When I find that something in Perl it'll often lead me to
something that does exist in Ruby because of a re-implementation which
has the same name or makes reference to the Perl version as its
inspiration, such as was the case with Mechanize recently.
"You know those little snippets that Google and other search engines
display when you
search for some terms? They contextualise the terms in the body of the
document and highlight them in a snippet that best represents how
they're used in the document. This is actually a really hard problem,
and it took me several goes to get L<Text::Context> right. It uses
L<Text::Context::EitherSide> as an "emergency" contextualizer if it
can't get anything right at all, but the algorithm itself is a bit of a
swine.
<paragraph continues, but separated for emphasis>
"I actually had to prototype this module in Ruby to get my
thinking clear enough to code it up in Perl..."
I was searching for a library in Ruby which I wasn't sure existed, and
sometimes I'll go looking to see if Perl has something. (And when
doesn't it?) When I find that something in Perl it'll often lead me to
something that does exist in Ruby because of a re-implementation which
has the same name or makes reference to the Perl version as its
inspiration, such as was the case with Mechanize recently.
"You know those little snippets that Google and other search engines
display when you
search for some terms? They contextualise the terms in the body of the
document and highlight them in a snippet that best represents how
they're used in the document. This is actually a really hard problem,
and it took me several goes to get L<Text::Context> right. It uses
L<Text::Context::EitherSide> as an "emergency" contextualizer if it
can't get anything right at all, but the algorithm itself is a bit of a
swine.
<paragraph continues, but separated for emphasis>
"I actually had to prototype this module in Ruby to get my
thinking clear enough to code it up in Perl..."
Does this seem a little muddle-headed to anyone!?
Maybe I still haven't had enough caffeine... but it doesn't sound
muddle-headed to me. I'm actually not sure what aspect of it you
mean. I certainly wouldn't second-guess Simon Cozens, who has written
more than 100 Perl modules, if that's how he felt he wanted to
proceed.
"I actually had to prototype this module in Ruby to get my
thinking clear enough to code it up in Perl..."
Does this seem a little muddle-headed to anyone!?
Maybe I still haven't had enough caffeine... but it doesn't sound
muddle-headed to me. I'm actually not sure what aspect of it you
mean. I certainly wouldn't second-guess Simon Cozens, who has written
more than 100 Perl modules, if that's how he felt he wanted to
proceed.
Remarkable testimony, too, on how language choice effects thinking.
Pretty striking if Simon Cozens has difficulty thinking something through in Perl, but finds that Ruby engenders clarity.
···
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006, thoran@thoran.com wrote:
--
James Britt
Judge a man by his questions, rather than his answers.
- Voltaire
I didn't spell it out, but it seems somehow wrong to go using a somewhat
similar language to prototype for another language.
In other words if Perl's causing excess brain strain, then dispense with
it. Trade up!
It certainly seems muddle-headed to me to go writing it twice, except
for the sake of interest. In this instance it wasn't simply an exercise
but (dare I say?) necessary in order to solve a problem.
And No-one is infallible. Even if it's the Big Cheese himself. (You
may choose your own Big Cheese as I'm all for choice when it comes to
Cheeses, Big or small.)
Sincerely,
thoran
P.S. Is it etiquette to quote or not to quote? I assume that given
threading that it isn't necessary. Hence there is nothing after
"I actually had to prototype this module in Ruby to get my
thinking clear enough to code it up in Perl..."
Does this seem a little muddle-headed to anyone!?
Maybe I still haven't had enough caffeine... but it doesn't sound
muddle-headed to me. I'm actually not sure what aspect of it you
mean. I certainly wouldn't second-guess Simon Cozens, who has written
more than 100 Perl modules, if that's how he felt he wanted to
proceed.
Remarkable testimony, too, on how language choice effects thinking.
Pretty striking if Simon Cozens has difficulty thinking something through in Perl, but finds that Ruby engenders clarity.
Simon took very strongly to Ruby, and was pretty visible for a while.
I don't really know, but I think he might be spending more time on his
ministry than on programming lately, at least to the extent that he
hasn't had time to hang out in Ruby-space. It's too bad -- it was
nice having him around.
>> Hi --
>>
> Remarkable testimony, too, on how language choice effects thinking.
>
> Pretty striking if Simon Cozens has difficulty thinking something through in
> Perl, but finds that Ruby engenders clarity.
Simon took very strongly to Ruby, and was pretty visible for a while.
I don't really know, but I think he might be spending more time on his
ministry than on programming lately, at least to the extent that he
hasn't had time to hang out in Ruby-space. It's too bad -- it was
nice having him around.
He did mention that he was stepping away from programming on his
blog last year. I think he was going on a ministerial training program.
···
On 3/17/06, dblack@wobblini.net <dblack@wobblini.net> wrote:
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006, James Britt wrote:
> dblack@wobblini.net wrote:
a) A member of of a derivative group of the Wobblies (most likely the children's brigade; northing's cuter than a bunch of kids on a labor strike line.)
or
b) A fan of Jah Wobble
···
--
James Britt
Judge a man by his questions, rather than his answers.
- Voltaire
Well clearly it had me going... I was wondering why there was a
simulated ellipsis there. Ah huh!
A greater penitence would be for him to code Ruby. Perhaps if we could
slip a new section into his bible at the seminary entitled "The Gospel
According to St. Matz"? (I'm assuming he's not a Buddhist or some other
faith than Christian. I mean would anyone dare touch the Quran?)
Nevertheless his joke contains an element of truth (like all jokes) and
portends of the way the wind is blowing. But we all knew that. Maybe
Simon couldn't face coding Ruby and chose another career?
We could have holy wars about a whole bunch of stuff... Like if Ruby is
pure OO, is it then a bit Catholic? Then what of Perl and Python? What
demonination are they?
thoran
P.S. I'm hoping Matz doesn't take his faith *that* seriously!
···
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 02:09:58 +0900, "Jim Freeze" <jimfreeze@gmail.com> said:
On Mar 17, 2006, at 10:50 AM, pat eyler wrote:
> He did mention that he was stepping away from programming on his
> blog last year. I think he was going on a ministerial training
> program.
No doubt as a some sort of restitution for all those years of
proselytizing Perl.
It's a sign! Prediction: Simon Cozens Will Code Ruby...
I accidently ended up on Simon Cozens website for the first time ever
and it turns out he is going to, of all places to be a missionary,
Japan! Clearly Matz has been too busy coding to be doing any religious
conversions if outside help is required.
Even more of an omen for Simon is in the photo of his latest blog entry
(http://blog.simon-cozens.org/)... If you look closely you'll see a
packet of Matzos on the left of the table.
