On Dec 8, 2003, at 10:31 PM, Tim Johnson wrote: [..]
[..]I will admit that the level of dedication and self-sacrifice required is exceedingly rare, and I'm stretching the analogy pretty thin anyway, so I'll leave it there.
Since I have stirred up some apparent confusion here, let me try to be clear in the response. I am not now, nor am I in any way impugning the technical expertise or skill of the perl porters, by what ever means that they have acquired their expertise.
An argument of 'academic' v. 'autodidactic' is functionally useless - since there are those who learn best from hands on experience, and those who learn from a more formal approach to the pedagogical arts. The challenge for the student is to figure out which is the better course of action for themselves. The problem then is resolving the relationship between what one 'knows' and what one can 'sell'.
Allow me to offer an argument by analogy that may help clarify the position. I was standing the duty as the AJOD ( Assitant Junior Officer of the Deck ) to a BM2 Holly ( boy does that tell you where we were on the pecking order ) and I asked him why, with his skill set he had not gone into the 'data processing' ratings. He shared with me the very useful perspective. As a "simple" (HA!) boatswain's mate he had a better line of advancement than had he gone into the canonical path for persons who were rated to work with 'information technology systems' - and could also secure for himself the time to 'screw around with computers' that he preferred to do, and was really good at doing, and as such was providing the 1st Lt's Locker with a-j-squared away 'computer support' that they could not otherwise secure by 'formal and official' channels.
Perl as a tool is the Boatswain's Best Friend. I would not at all be surprised to find Holly Hacking Perl. He had a keen intuitive understanding for what was USEFUL.
As I would explain to the VP of Engineering at one place, when he failed to understand the deep inner 'religious commitment' that some of us have for 'jury rigging', it is that FINE ART of getting the ship back to port so that all of them thar High Priced Naval Engineers can do the voodoo they do so well. But that potential availablity of the 'high priced help' is really not gonna do anyone any good over the 50 fathom curve if we turn into REEF FODDER.
So if, as Dan Muey has found the inclination, one is interested in better understanding say 'c' and how to deal with 'pointers' and memory allocations, then please avail one's self of the same 'learning to learn' skills that one acquired to learn about Perl to learn about 'c code'. And IF one really does need to be implementing 'cost effective' algorthims, please, do not let me be the excuse for NOT getting the level of competent training that would help you get there.
IF one REALLY wants to do that with some sense of funk, then download the current release of the perl source code and rummage around in it. Just as you would rummage round in a Perl Module. IF you don't get it, then send email off to the cat who cut the code and say,
Hey, in foo.c you did....
most of them will be more than willing to explain why they went that way...
But just like you learned how to learn Perl remember that 'c', et al, has it's, well, foibles, arcanea, and whizz bangery stuff...
ciao drieux
---
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://learn.perl.org/> <http://learn.perl.org/first-response>
