A corollary is that, if St. Larry is virtuous, then:
I will admit that the virtue of hubris might outweigh the virtue of laziness, and lead an individual programmer to seek the glory of sainthood.
But I'm probably not one of them. As an esteemed programmer-god, I proclaim proudly that I possess heaping amounts of the virtue of laziness, so it looks like way too much work to gain Perl Monk sainthood. Therefore, unless you can grant me sainthood right this minute, y'all will never hear from me again.
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re: Q.E.D.-Perl Monks are not canonically virtuous
by footpad (Abbot) on May 12, 2001 at 07:15 UTC | |
|
Re: Q.E.D.-Perl Monks are not canonically virtuous
by chipmunk (Parson) on May 12, 2001 at 06:49 UTC | |
|
(jeffa) Re: Q.E.D.-Perl Monks are not canonically virtuous
by jeffa (Bishop) on May 12, 2001 at 08:05 UTC | |
|
Re: Q.E.D.-Perl Monks are not canonically virtuous
by damian1301 (Curate) on May 12, 2001 at 23:59 UTC | |
|
Re: Q.E.D.-Perl Monks are not canonically virtuous
by nysus (Parson) on May 13, 2001 at 19:48 UTC | |
|
Re: Q.E.D.-Perl Monks are not canonically virtuous
by petesmiley (Friar) on May 15, 2001 at 00:44 UTC |