Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
Advanced Search
Author
Subject
Message
Special notice only

16 results from messages in extremeperl

Advanced Search
  • On Sep 1, 2005, at 8:20 AM, Terrence Brannon wrote: > He also said that while XP is good in general when you are trying to > beat everyone to market, it is impractical: they could have been a > year ahead of everyone but instead were a year behind. I'd like to see a company that truly uses XP. Most of the time, I see companies adopt little bits and pieces but many of those pieces...
    Curtis Poe Sep 1, 2005
  • On Aug 31, 2005, at 4:28 PM, Rob Nagler wrote: > > Given that most are unlikely to use Bivio, perhaps someone can > propose > > a Test::Declare framework using Perl's standard testing tools? What > > would the syntax be? > > Talk about NIH. ;-) Possibly, but it's fair to point out that if a company has an established, working code base, switching to Bivio may not be cost effective...
    Curtis Poe Sep 1, 2005
  • Rob Nagler wrote: >in Bivio::Test this would be: > > use strict; > use Bivio::Test; > Bivio::Test->new('EMA')->unit([ > EMA => [ > new => [ > -2 => Bivio::DieCode->DIE, > 0 => Bivio::DieCode->DIE, > 1 => undef, > 2.5 => Bivio::DieCode->DIE, > ], > ], > ]); You know, I really think this is interesting when you compare it to another email: > > #! /usr/bin/perl > > > > use strict...
    Curtis Poe Aug 31, 2005
  • Fetching Sponsored Content...
  • On Jun 6, 2005, at 10:24 AM, Perrin Harkins wrote: > On Mon, 2005-06-06 at 12:06 -0400, Adam Turoff wrote: > > The real benefit of mixins is that code works in a more aspectish > > manner. > > It makes sense; I just think the implementation is lacking. It's > supposed to be a workaround for the problems with adding functionality > through inheritance, but I think there has to be a...
    Curtis Poe Jun 6, 2005
  • On Jun 6, 2005, at 9:46 AM, Terrence Brannon wrote: > I think Perl 6 is the biggest danger to Perl's future. The main > thing I don't like about Perl6 is the disdain for backwards > compatibility: > > ? : is now ?? :: > -> is now . > for's semantics have changed There is no disdain for backwards compatibility. This has always been one of the biggest concerns of the Perl 6...
    Curtis Poe Jun 6, 2005
  • On Apr 8, 2005, at 4:22 PM, Terrence Brannon wrote: > whitebox testing means looking at your code and writing tests based on > what you see there. until the code is written there is nothing that > can be seen or whitebox-tested. It's takes me about two seconds to say "I'm going to write this line of code. I had better write a test for it first." Cheers, Ovid [Non-text portions of...
    Curtis Poe Apr 8, 2005
  • On Apr 7, 2005, at 12:49 PM, Tom Vilot wrote: > I generally have found that most programming projects are dictated by > the available resource and the bias of that pool of people, not by the > "ideal" language for a given problem. Which points to a sticky problem in my line of reasoning: I was arguing two points. One, Nagler claims that one doesn't need to learn languages in other...
    Curtis Poe Apr 7, 2005
  • On Apr 7, 2005, at 11:26 AM, Rob Kinyon wrote: > That's a straw man. Competent project management would not allow for > the choice of poor tools. I wondered if anyone was going to go that route, and you have. So you agree that choice of language is relevant, given a problem domain. This belies Nagler's insistence upon hammering in screws (witness his attempt to find theorem proving...
    Curtis Poe Apr 7, 2005
  • > . . . Research into development has shown that the impact of project > management outweighs the impact of the choice of languages (and > development tools and programming techniques) by enormous margins -- > at least ten to one. . . . I wasn't going to say anything, but I'm surprised no one has commented about this red herring. First, I wouldn't mind see a reference for this...
    Curtis Poe Apr 7, 2005
  • On Apr 5, 2005, at 5:22 AM, Rob Kinyon wrote: > > Not interested. I haven't found a problem that I needed Haskell to > > solve. When I do, I'll sign up. > > I don't know if this is going to become a habit, but I'm with Rob on > this one. Not because I think Haskell is useless or that FP is > useless. The difference here is that you admit that other languages may be superior choices...
    Curtis Poe Apr 5, 2005