"Selling" Perl (i.e. getting the boss to let me install it)

Willem <willem@stack.nl> wrote:

> Sherm Pendley wrote:
> ) "Dave Everson" <d a v i d . e v e r s o n @ h p . c o m> writes:
> )> In some
> )> shops you can't install VI. Those aren't serious development
> organizations )> and I would stay away.
> )
> ) Some developers believe that they can't possibly write a single line
> ) of code without their favorite editor or IDE. Those aren't serious
> ) developers and I would stay away.
>
> Some managers believe that the opinions of a developer, on issues such
> as the correlation between editor familiarity and productivity, should
> not be taken seriously.

Wouldn't amaze me if those managers had in many cases a point. Sorry about
that news, it's probably not what you want to hear :-D

For the record, I am a freelance developer, and have learned a long time
ago that productivity is sooner limited by that gray stuff between the
ears than anything else. Probably because I had so often to make do what
was available.

I would have no problem with coding in Notepad. Of course I would miss
some things (and probably would write some small Perl scripts to fix
that), but most of my coding is typing out stuff. Thinking happens (here)
on paper :-).

--
John http://johnbokma.com/ - Hacking & Hiking in Mexico

Perl help in exchange for a gift:
http://johnbokma.com/perl/help-in-ex...or-a-gift.html

Sherm Pendley <spamtrap@dot-app.org> wrote:

> "Dave Everson" <d a v i d . e v e r s o n @ h p . c o m> writes:
>
>> In some
>> shops you can't install VI. Those aren't serious development
>> organizations and I would stay away.
>
> Some developers believe that they can't possibly write a single line
> of code without their favorite editor or IDE. Those aren't serious
> developers and I would stay away.

Amen to that :-). I do most my coding in TextPad, and several years back I
suddenly had to use vim. After a day or 2 I was used to it (I had used
vi/vim in the past but not that excessive).

Same with version control. I am used to subversion now, but that's just
because I like TortoiseSVN a lot. Doesn't mean that I suddenly would be
crippled if I have to use svn on the cli. The ideas are the same.

And if I miss something, I code it; I am a programmer :-).

--
John http://johnbokma.com/ - Hacking & Hiking in Mexico

Perl help in exchange for a gift:
http://johnbokma.com/perl/help-in-ex...or-a-gift.html

John Bokma wrote:
) Wouldn't amaze me if those managers had in many cases a point. Sorry about
) that news, it's probably not what you want to hear :-D

s/news/opinion/ :-)

) For the record, I am a freelance developer, and have learned a long time
) ago that productivity is sooner limited by that gray stuff between the
) ears than anything else. Probably because I had so often to make do what
) was available.
)
) I would have no problem with coding in Notepad. Of course I would miss
) some things (and probably would write some small Perl scripts to fix
) that), but most of my coding is typing out stuff. Thinking happens (here)
) on paper :-).

Most of my work consists of working on existing code, finding out where to
make changes, finding out how things work, and then making small changes in
several places. In such cases, certain features are invaluable.

In any case, you're talking about 'problem coding on other than favourite
editor' while I'm talking about 'being faster in favourite editor'.

So if most of your work is typing out stuff then, yes, you won't be much
faster in another editor. But if most of your work is *editing* stuff,
then I *will* be much faster, in my opinion.


SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT

>>>>> "W" == Willem <willem@stack.nl> writes:

W> Some managers believe that the opinions of a developer, on issues
W> such as the correlation between editor familiarity and
W> productivity, should not be taken seriously. Those aren't
W> serious managers and I would stay away.

Indeed. On the other hand, this is what interviews are for: they are
just as much for the potential employee to evaluate the company as for
the company to evaluate the potential customer. I've turned down jobs
because they were needlessly restrictive about work environment and
development environment, because I know what I like and I know what I
find annoying, and I don't really want to spend 8 hours a day being
annoyed because my manager thinks my comfort level with the tools I'm
using is less important than a foolish consistency on everyone's desktop.

I mean, we're working with *text files*. "Standardizing" on a single
editor, or even on a single platform, is dim. The group I work in has
people on Macs, Windows, and Linux, and I couldn't tell you what most of
the people use for editors. This is a good thing.

Charlton


--
Charlton Wilbur
cwilbur@chromatico.net

Willem <willem@stack.nl> wrote:

> John Bokma wrote:
> ) Wouldn't amaze me if those managers had in many cases a point. Sorry
> about ) that news, it's probably not what you want to hear :-D
>
> s/news/opinion/ :-)
>
> ) For the record, I am a freelance developer, and have learned a long
> time ) ago that productivity is sooner limited by that gray stuff
> between the ) ears than anything else. Probably because I had so often
> to make do what ) was available.
> )
> ) I would have no problem with coding in Notepad. Of course I would
> miss ) some things (and probably would write some small Perl scripts
> to fix ) that), but most of my coding is typing out stuff. Thinking
> happens (here) ) on paper :-).
>
> Most of my work consists of working on existing code, finding out
> where to make changes, finding out how things work, and then making
> small changes in several places. In such cases, certain features are
> invaluable.

Which ones?

> In any case, you're talking about 'problem coding on other than
> favourite
> editor' while I'm talking about 'being faster in favourite editor'.

I don't think that I am faster in my favourite editor TextPad, than in,
say for example Vim (I am learning Emacs, but if I have edited a few files
in it, I don't think I am faster or slower compared to TextPad).

Of course, if I have to switch from TextPad to, say Kate, today, I have to
get used to Kate. But after some time (a week or so), IMO I *should* be as
fast as with TextPad.

> So if most of your work is typing out stuff then, yes, you won't be
> much faster in another editor. But if most of your work is *editing*
> stuff, then I *will* be much faster, in my opinion.

I don't see why yet. The time I had to use vim a lot was on a huge (650+
inhouse Perl modules) code maintainance project. I was very used to
TextPad back then, but in no time I was splitting windows in vim, and
jumping to lines with issues.

--
John http://johnbokma.com/ - Hacking & Hiking in Mexico

Perl help in exchange for a gift:
http://johnbokma.com/perl/help-in-ex...or-a-gift.html

In article <864p4u6yww.fsf@mithril.chromatico.net>,
Charlton Wilbur <cwilbur@chromatico.net> wrote:

> >>>>> "W" == Willem <willem@stack.nl> writes:
>
> W> Some managers believe that the opinions of a developer, on issues
> W> such as the correlation between editor familiarity and
> W> productivity, should not be taken seriously. Those aren't
> W> serious managers and I would stay away.
>
> Indeed. On the other hand, this is what interviews are for: they are
> just as much for the potential employee to evaluate the company as for
> the company to evaluate the potential customer. I've turned down jobs
> because they were needlessly restrictive about work environment and
> development environment, because I know what I like and I know what I
> find annoying, and I don't really want to spend 8 hours a day being
> annoyed because my manager thinks my comfort level with the tools I'm
> using is less important than a foolish consistency on everyone's desktop.
>
> I mean, we're working with *text files*. "Standardizing" on a single
> editor, or even on a single platform, is dim. The group I work in has
> people on Macs, Windows, and Linux, and I couldn't tell you what most of
> the people use for editors. This is a good thing.
>
> Charlton

Yeah, they all might be on different platforms, but I'll bet you all
conform to a "coding standard". Stuff like parens on separate lines,
indents are 2 spaces, put spaces around ( ), etc. A friend is rather
picky about "his" coding standards and managed to get a lot of them
implemented in the startup where he worked. It saved a lot when looking
through their huge code-base.

And what about standardizing on the comments for fixing bugs? This guy
also commented his code with the specific bug in their tracking database
as well as other relevant info. When their bugtrack system went south
due to a dim-witted sysadmin inept building move, much of the bugs could
be retrieved from the comments in the code base.

Sometimes standards are a good thing. Just don't ever make me use
Windows. I charge 100x for working on Windows.

--
DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...
[I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically by ignored]

John Bokma wrote:
) Willem <willem@stack.nl> wrote:
)> Most of my work consists of working on existing code, finding out
)> where to make changes, finding out how things work, and then making
)> small changes in several places. In such cases, certain features are
)> invaluable.
)
) Which ones?

Search, replace, macro recording on the fly, diffing between split
windows, and all the syntax highlighting and autoindenting and such.
Plus the simple extensibility with a scripting language, which a vi
user already knows most of, because it's basically the same as the
editing commands.

Of course, most editors have that stuff, but if you use all of it, it
takes a lot more time to learn all the relevant keyboard shortcuts to
do the things you want to do.

)> In any case, you're talking about 'problem coding on other than
)> favourite
)> editor' while I'm talking about 'being faster in favourite editor'.
)
) I don't think that I am faster in my favourite editor TextPad, than in,
) say for example Vim (I am learning Emacs, but if I have edited a few files
) in it, I don't think I am faster or slower compared to TextPad).

The big advantage vim has over most other editors is that it can be
completely controlled from thust the basic alphanumeric keys, so you don't
have to lift your hands from the main part of the keyboard to do stuff.

Then there is the advantage that all the editing commands can be used
in conjunction with all the movement commands, making possible a lot
of advanced editing shortcuts that most other editors don't have.

Downside is the steep learning curve of having to memorize all the
commands, so switching *to* vim is usually not recommended.

) Of course, if I have to switch from TextPad to, say Kate, today, I have to
) get used to Kate. But after some time (a week or so), IMO I *should* be as
) fast as with TextPad.

I'm not familiar with Kate but I assume they are both quite similar.
Vim, on the other hand, is quite different as mentioned before. Of
course, ths modern versions have mouse menus and stuff, but it's the
keyboard commands that set it apart. Not using the mouse -> BIG speedup.

)> So if most of your work is typing out stuff then, yes, you won't be
)> much faster in another editor. But if most of your work is *editing*
)> stuff, then I *will* be much faster, in my opinion.
)
) I don't see why yet. The time I had to use vim a lot was on a huge (650+
) inhouse Perl modules) code maintainance project. I was very used to
) TextPad back then, but in no time I was splitting windows in vim, and
) jumping to lines with issues.

Were you using the keyboard commands, or the menu entries ?


SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT

Willem <willem@stack.nl> wrote:

> John Bokma wrote:

[..]

> Of course, most editors have that stuff, but if you use all of it, it
> takes a lot more time to learn all the relevant keyboard shortcuts to
> do the things you want to do.

Another thing a lot of editors share is the ability to redefine the
keyboard shortcuts (Although it's something I try to avoid).

> The big advantage vim has over most other editors is that it can be
> completely controlled from thust the basic alphanumeric keys, so you
> don't have to lift your hands from the main part of the keyboard to do
> stuff.

Only thing I can think off that requires the mouse in TextPad is moving
the splitter. But I don't mind to move my hands away from the keyboard
now and then, I have no problems with the mouse, and some things I do
faster with it.

> Downside is the steep learning curve of having to memorize all the
> commands, so switching *to* vim is usually not recommended.

Heh, I can't see why.

> ) Of course, if I have to switch from TextPad to, say Kate, today, I
> have to ) get used to Kate. But after some time (a week or so), IMO I
> *should* be as ) fast as with TextPad.
>
> I'm not familiar with Kate but I assume they are both quite similar.

Nor am I (on purpose, but I've used it a few times, some time ago), and
no idea how similar they are. But that was somewhat my point :-)

> Vim, on the other hand, is quite different as mentioned before.

I can't see why, or maybe I am too used to vi/vim :-).

> Of
> course, ths modern versions have mouse menus and stuff, but it's the
> keyboard commands that set it apart. Not using the mouse -> BIG
> speedup.

To me that depends on what I am doing, and I think that I am experienced
enough with my current editor that I automatically make the right
decision between keyboard and mouse.


> ) I don't see why yet. The time I had to use vim a lot was on a huge
> (650+ ) inhouse Perl modules) code maintainance project. I was very
> used to ) TextPad back then, but in no time I was splitting windows in
> vim, and ) jumping to lines with issues.
>
> Were you using the keyboard commands, or the menu entries ?

Keyboard. I don't use the mouse much while editing in TextPad except
when it works faster (or is the only way)

--
John http://johnbokma.com/ - Hacking & Hiking in Mexico

Perl help in exchange for a gift:
http://johnbokma.com/perl/help-in-ex...or-a-gift.html

>>>>> "JB" == John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> writes:

>> In such cases, certain
>> features are invaluable.

JB> Which ones?

Incremental search. Search & replace using regular expressions. Code
narrowing or folding (depending on what your editor calls it).
Parenthesis/brace/bracket matching.

Secondarily, Emacs keybindings for keyboard navigation. I imprinted
on them over a decade ago; they're in my muscle memory now.

Charlton


--
Charlton Wilbur
cwilbur@chromatico.net

John Bokma wrote:
) Another thing a lot of editors share is the ability to redefine the
) keyboard shortcuts (Although it's something I try to avoid).

Well okay, I'll concede that. But still you have to use key combinations
(ctrl-this, alt-that, I imagine ?)

)> The big advantage vim has over most other editors is that it can be
)> completely controlled from thust the basic alphanumeric keys, so you
)> don't have to lift your hands from the main part of the keyboard to do
)> stuff.
)
) Only thing I can think off that requires the mouse in TextPad is moving
) the splitter. But I don't mind to move my hands away from the keyboard
) now and then, I have no problems with the mouse, and some things I do
) faster with it.

Yes, but you have to use the *whole* keyboard, not just the alphanumeric
bits. That makes a bit of difference.

)> Vim, on the other hand, is quite different as mentioned before.
)
) I can't see why, or maybe I am too used to vi/vim :-).

Well, there is still the use of easy macro recording, the ease of
combining almost any edit command with almost any move command, and
the ease of adding custom scripts. Of course, emacs has the first
and the last as well, and probably the second too.
Downside of emacs is escape-meta-alt-control-shift :-P


In any case, perhaps I could get to comparable speed with another editor,
but I very much doubt it would take me only a week to do so, even if I were
to spend the whole week doing nothing but familiarize myself with the
editor. I tend to use *a lot* of more powerful functionality of vim,
learned from years of working with it. Perhaps all of that is also
available in other editors (although I actually doubt all of it is) but
that is *a lot* of stuff to relearn.


SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT