This post while informative was nothing more than a review of an article. That being said, I'll get down to the work of reviewing...

Ovid mentions that the author, Paul Graham, is targeting the Lisp community but goes on to say that it can be useful to Perl programmers as well. He shows how Mr. Graham compares Perl to Lisp with some nice example code. He explains that the article has Python (although they are "a bit clumsy") and Java ("but Java's strong typing gets in the way") code samples as well.
Ovid goes on to say this article would be of particular interest to Perl hackers. Why? Because Perl hackers can out code Lisp hackers any day... or something like that. I was starting to lose interest in the review by this point. That's okay though because he was trying to wrap it up anyway. He mentions development time at Company A using Perl vs. Company B using something else and ends on Pointy Haired Bosses and budgets...

Overall, I'd rate this review a 7 out of 10. It was informative but a bit too long for a review of an article. Had this been a book review, the length would have been fine and probably rated a 9 out of 10.

Better luck next time Ovid!

Matthew Musgrove

 

 

 

P.S. If you haven't already guessed by now, this is a joke. Screamer mentioned reviews of reviews ;) in Re: Move Review Categories. Ovid I hope you are not mad at me for this... :)

  • Comment on Review of Productivity and Perl by Ovid

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Review of Review of Productivity and Perl by Ovid
by tadman (Prior) on Jun 07, 2002 at 23:54 UTC
    go_read($this->{review}->{review}->{article}) && form_own_opinion(); By the way, I'd rate your review at a 4/10, since it was too brief and lacked wit.
[reply]
[d/l]
      $read->{review}->{article} = "done";
my $option->{review}->{article} = "good";
$write->{review}->{review}->{article} = "satire";

      [download]
      ++tadman You are quite right. It definitely lacks wit. My attempt at creating a humorous post by trying to sound serious ended up really sounding serious.
      As for it being too brief, I disagree. Who wants to read a review that is as long as the material being reviewed? Not me!
      Anyway, let this be a guide to future generations as to how not to write a satire of a review of a review of an article!
      updated:6/7/02 10:35 CDT
      Who says that programmers can't work in the Marketing Department?
      Or is that who says that Marketing people can't program?
[reply]
[d/l]
        Well, you did manage to make me shrug at the title when I scanned the Newest Nodes today, then chuckle as I loaded the node. Above all I was relieved it wasn't really serious, though. For extra effect, it actually should have been as long as the review you were reviewing. :-) Although I wonder what you'd've written to fill up that much space in this case.. Oh well; a half hearted ++ for a well meant but somewhat unlucky effort. :-)

        Makeshifts last the longest.

[reply]

Back to Perl Monks Discussion