Looking to hire a PERL guru

Jesse Stay jesse at thestays.org
Wed Jan 17 18:39:32 MST 2007


On 1/17/07, Paul Seamons <paul at seamons.com> wrote:
> Bingo.  I know that Randall is brilliant.  Randall is great at making things
> work.  He is fine at helping to build community.  I also know that I wouldn't
> want him working for me (and my make-believe company).  If you watch
> Randall's posts on perlmonks, he has softened and matured over the years.  He
> doesn't appear to be as picky about the issue as he once was.  Isn't it great
> that we can learn over time.

I'll agree to disagree.  Also, if you watch the jobs-perl-discuss list
on perl.org he and others have spoken out about this in the last year
or two.  While I agree it's silly to be picky about simple
capitalization, I still like to warn companies about doing it the
right way - they will miss out on some good potential candidates by
not doing so.

> Being a smart Perl programmer doesn't mean somebody will be a good employee.

I agree - I'm still sticking to my point that you will miss out on
some good programmers or even employees by not spelling it the way
many of them preferred to be called.

> The majority of people being picky about it have little reason to be picky
> about it.  Randall has been around plenty long to have every right to be
> picky.

I still think it's in good faith to notify companies that are doing
wrong that they are doing it wrong so when they post elsewhere they
don't miss out on good employees.  I also don't think there's such
thing as a "right" to be picky about this.  There's been established a
right and a wrong way to do it - true, not everyone follows it, and
I'm sure Larry wouldn't be picky because he's the biggest proponent of
TIMTOWTDI, but frankly, I'm on this list.  When I see "PERL", while
I'm not too picky, I do always question who the poster is - are they a
Perl programmer, or just an HR person, and do I need to worry that I'm
going to be working with programmers that aren't involved enough to
care about stuff like that?  True, it probably doesn't matter, and
many programmers just don't care, and it has nothing to do with
programming or logic specifically, but it does at least hint at the
possibility of lack of experience or lack of attention to detail of
those I might be working with.  It's something I might at least ask
about.

> Three or four old timers on perlmonks doesn't qualify as "most".  Also
> important to note: though there is some overlap, the community of
> perlmonks.org is not the Perl community.

I agree, but it is a very smart community relied on by much of the
rest of the Perl community that you could miss out on.

> Most of the ones I've met are really just being picky.
>
> Many, if not most are trying to earn points on perlmonks.  Or in an odd
> psychological exchange are trying to earn karma back for karma that they lost
> the first time that they posted PERL to perlmonks.

I didn't even hear this first on perlmonks.  I heard it personally
from other Perl programmers I've worked with, as well as others in the
Perl community I've personally associated with.  I learned about
perlmonks much later.

> Thank you for helping me with the history of Perl.

I know you don't need help with the history of Perl - it was meant to
educate (I don't think I was really bashing the original poster) an
employer on why I thought PERL was the incorrect use of the term.

>
> I don't recall Larry getting up in arms about the case of Perl.  He may have
> given corrections in rare occasions and I'm sure he has even authored
> instructions about how you "should" use the word Perl in different
> situations.   Based on watching his responses on mailing lists and at
> perlmonks, I don't think he really cares about this argument.

I don't think Larry cares either - in fact, he jokingly makes up his
own acronyms for it in the Camel Book.  My point, and many others is
that PERL was not originally an acronym, and I at least wonder at
those that spell it that way at their knowledge and experience with
the language.

> Any new
> mailing list poster who is new to perl mailing lists or community who
> unwittingly spells perl wrong in a question to Larry amazing has Larry answer
> his question - not dwell on how he spelled perl wrong.  The best way to
> isolate a newcomer is to throw culture police idioms at them.

I don't think anyone asked a question about PERL - I would have
happily answered without even questioning the use if they were asking
a question spelled that way.  I was simply giving a useful tip to an
employer trying to use the term, in which, I think there are people
that will disregard the posting if it's not spelled correctly.  If
anything, maybe it could give the employer something to talk about
with the Perl programmer applying for the job to determine the
programmer's experience and understanding of the culture.

> I hope you aren't speaking for the seasoned veterans.  Seasoned veterans who
> don't know how to help somebody who doesn't know better aren't the ones that
> are good at building a community.

I take offense at that - I know you have more years experience than I
but I've been programming Perl long enough to know what I'm talking
about.  Again, no one asked a Perl question - I *was* helping someone
who didn't know better.  I feel I am building a community here - I
have excluded no one.  I was simply giving a tip to an employer on how
they could potentially target more prospects.

> It is a thing which I abide (as in I am strict what I emit) but I do not
> enforce (as in I am broad in what I accept) because I am contributing to the
> community.

Neither do I - I am willing to admit to employers using the term wrong
however that there will be some that disregard their job posting
because they used the term wrong.

-- 

#!/usr/bin/perl
$^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$<Sn||n<|}j=<$$<Yn{u<Qjltn{ > 0gFzD gD, 00Fz,
0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/
#y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print



More information about the PLUG mailing list