It's all about presentation.

TheDamian's presentation of Lingua::tlhInganHol::yIghun is very entertaining, and I believe that nobody looks for much more beyond it than its entertainment value.

Your presentation of your "unique method" does not define your "unique method", and it seems to be just another way of embedding some tagged language that is not even Perl into your web page templates. At least that is still the impression I get from your posts. This is something that HTML::Mason has already done, as has PLP, as has Template::Toolkit, in various levels of depth/integration.

What would make your approach interesting to me would be a detailed comparison of the commonalities and differences between your "unique method" and the existing methods, so I can easily gauge why you think that your "unique method" is better than the existing methods I know well. As you have not demonstrated knowledge of the existing tools, I'm unwilling to invest time into learning your tool, just to find out that it does what the other tools do as well, but different.

But then, I told the same thing to you already, so the people telling you that you're not listening to their advice might be correct.

Update Fixed typo, spotted by ig

First off, to get it out of my system:

... a completely useless tool to write perl in Klingon, ...

This sounds awesome, how dare you call it useless. :-)

All kidding aside, you need to post links to what you are talking about. After doing some digging I assume (and only assume) that you are talking about Too difficult for me.... Correct me if I'm wrong.

continue_reading() unless wrong();
[download]

No one can ever know why someone thinks/responds/acts the way they do. But I think that your problem is partly in the presentation and responses. I am saying this not to attack you but to offer pointers to help get your point across.

If people ask for code and there is no legal/ethical/business reason not to give them the code, you should comply. People want to see what you have done.

You wouldn't like my code.... My code doesn't need fixing... it needs replacing! the parser I have written implements the syntax and provides a working platform, but it is pre-alpha at best.

Be that as it may unless you have a good reason for keeping the code to yourself (see above) keeping the code to yourself doesn't help sell your idea.

The other nugget of advice I gleaned from reading your post is that it was slightly hard to read. I think you have a good idea. Many good ideas weren't understood/clearly explained/accepted in the beginning. Work on the "clearly explained" part.

Again I would like to state that this is not an attack of you or your idea. I post because I think that the idea is good and would like to help try to provide a more objective view of how you presented your idea. For example your lack of a link in this post highlights part of how you might need to practice reading your post as though you don't know the things that you know. You know what idea you are talking about. A random monk might not.

I sincerely hope that some of this is useful to you.

All kidding aside, you need to post links to what you are talking about. After doing some digging I assume (and only assume) that you are talking about Too difficult for me.... Correct me if I'm wrong.

I rather guess it's about RFC : Abstraction Markup.

Perl 6 - second systems done right

Why is it, that if someone writes a completely useless tool to write perl in Klingon, people are all over it

I just don't have time to wrap it up in a pretty package

All right, I just voted it up.

Now, what I would say to you now is ... (a) grow just a bit of a “thick skin,” ... (b) above all else, don’t take anything personally ... (c) package up your work in a pretty bow and put it out there on CPAN without any further (grousing or...) delay.

It is usually a waste of time to seek a consensus of opinion.   It is even more a waste of time to seek the praisings of a crowd.   Even if you have got your feelings hurt, don’t let it show.   Don’t let it get in the way of your work.

You developed the tool, and you found it useful ... so, by gawd, somebody else out there might well find it useful, too ... and that is enough.   People come to CPAN for one thing:   to get very excellent software, quickly.   Their decision of whether or not to use it, so long as it does indeed work as advertised, is entirely their decision, so you’re officially off the hook.   I don’t seriously think that there are too many “original” ideas in this world anyhow, but I can count on just one set of toes and fingers the ones that I think were well done...   When one of those comes along, everyone sits up and takes notice, and sometimes, some detractor gets proved wrong.

FISI =   “<*!!>   It ... Ship It!”

... and ... quit whining.   :-D

First of all, people don't want to change their opinions on things they have believed their whole life (or Perl career). For example, when Nicolas Copernicus told the world that the Earth was not the center of the Universe, Nobody wanted to believe him. This is because humans are stubborn and, as I said before, don't want to change their opinions that easily.

Also, your presentation might not have been as good as it could have.

This is because humans are stubborn and, as I said before, don't want to change their opinions that easily.

It's very easy to change my mind -- just show me verifiable proof.

---

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.