Re^2: Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing

As a fellow bioinformatician and programmer, I have to say that I could not possibly care less about these things. They're slick marketing around some slick code that some people find useful. A sizable number of modules on CPAN (though a small fraction of the total) are just as useful, but not as aggressively marketed.

I am not sure what the problem is with "slick marketing around... slick code," if any. I, for one, welcome it. Is this purported slickness harming perl? It seems that the last sentence in the quote above implies perhaps that the sizable number of modules on CPAN that are just as useful should indeed be aggressively, and hopefully, slickly, marketed, non?

when small people start casting long shadows, it is time to go to bed

Comment on Re^2: Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing by Ea (Chaplain) on Mar 11, 2011 at 18:08 UTC
Well, then feast your eyes on pdl.perl.org Looks like someone with a better eye for design recently got a hold of the website, which a lot of projects would benefit from. These efforts are crucial to get people excited about using Perl. If we don't, the language risks stagnation and people will move on - something Jon Orwant pointed out 10 years ago As a community, I'd suggest that people aim to be ready to shout their efforts with loads of slick marketing for the launch of Perl 6 and ride the wave of shininess. Jokes aside, The Year of Perl 6 should really be a whole year full of Perl. perl -e 'print qq(Just another Perl Hacker\n)' # where's the irony switch?	[reply]
Re^4: Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing by Anonymous Monk on Mar 11, 2011 at 20:37 UTC
These efforts are crucial to get people excited about using Perl Debatable, see Site facelift?	[reply]
Re^4: Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing by JavaFan (Canon) on Mar 11, 2011 at 22:16 UTC
If we don't, the language risks stagnation and people will move on - something Jon Orwant pointed out 10 years ago That quite invalidates the argument, doesn't? It's 10 years later, and Perl still hasn't wilted away. I'd even say, Perl is stronger than it was 10 years ago (sure, it's not so much hyped as it used to, but that's not the same).	[reply]
Re^5: Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing by TimToady (Parson) on Mar 12, 2011 at 01:53 UTC
Nope, doesn't invalidate the argument at all, since much of the excitement in the Perl 5 community these days is from ideas originally generated for Perl 6 and borrowed back. (And most of the Perl 6 folks are quite happy with a re-invigorated Perl 5, by the way.) Without Jon Orwant ten years ago you wouldn't have Moose today.	[reply]