David Shultz

• About: Lead developer of a large entirely Perl B2B application. Avid Perl enthusiast.

Recent Actions

• Commented on Let's try this again
  That is a rather large topic in and of itself. I'll write a post comparing Moo(se) features against what alternatives exist(ed) prior to Moo(se). As a short answer to your question, Moo(se) lazy attributes are (according to the docs) stubbed...
• Commented on Let's try this again
  Which feature(s) are you curious about? I'll do my best to answer given that some of the code I can't talk about in detail due to it being owned by my employer...
• Commented on Is the pro/con "Modern Perl" divide a symptom of Steve Yegge's "software political axis"?
  Here here, they should know about Moo(se), and they should also know about other options. I think part of the issue here is that when myself and others stated they didn't like Moo(se) we were told that either we were...
• Commented on Is the pro/con "Modern Perl" divide a symptom of Steve Yegge's "software political axis"?
  And good riddance, those things were ugly!...
• Commented on Is the pro/con "Modern Perl" divide a symptom of Steve Yegge's "software political axis"?
  That is a great article, in my case I would say it doesn't strictly apply. Namely while I prefer an alternative to Moo(se) for object management I have been using everything "use Modern::Perl" provides for far longer then said module...
• Commented on Let's try this again
  I turned on comment moderation because I'm not going to argue with someone who is continually condescending and rude. Just because we are on the Internet does not mean you get to be excessively rude and that I have to...
• Commented on Let's try this again
  It looks like I made myself misunderstood. Let me simplify my position for convenience: the advances made to Moo(se) have been available to me for a long time. Thus there is nothing new or fancy in Moo(se) that I personally...
• Commented on Pre-Modern Perl VS Post-Modern Perl: FIGHT!
  @paul I tried to respond but ended up with to much to say so it ended up as a full post...
• Commented on Pre-Modern Perl VS Post-Modern Perl: FIGHT!
  At what point did I say "so please stop touting Modern Perl"? I freely admit (as shown in my first reply to this post) that I used the term "Modern Perl" which was completely in error, I meant Moo(se)....
• Posted Let's try this again to Core Perl

  This started as a reply comment on another post about “people” being rude, that being the case please forgive how it starts.

  I'm not sure I agree that the community has always been inclusive, I'll point (again) to chromatic's post back in 2k11 http://modernperlbooks.com/mt/2011/04/…

• Commented on Pre-Modern Perl VS Post-Modern Perl: FIGHT!
  "Modern Perl" as I understand it (and as I posted about it) refers to Moo(se). I'll clarify that in any future comments I make about the topic, I apologize, I should have been more clear about that. I do...
• Commented on I love pre-modern Perl and so should you, my introduction
  I'm completely with you Matthew, I agree that each person/team should pick the tools they are comfortable with and knowledgeable about. I haven't had any issues with C::MM myself in relation to list vs scalar context of arrays but...
• Commented on I love pre-modern Perl and so should you, my introduction
  Thanks for the reply Stevan, Moo does appear to provide many of the features Moose offers minus the meta stuff. I'm going to play around with it but for posts I'll stick to the core....
• Commented on I love pre-modern Perl and so should you, my introduction
  So I just schooled up on Moose::Manual::Roles and I can't see how they are not exactly like mixins. They play with the namespace differently (cleaner?) as much of Moose does. How do they differ from mixins? I also looked at...
• Commented on I love pre-modern Perl and so should you, my introduction
  I am curious, I have worked with Ovid, I know him both personally and professionally, I'll reach out to him on the topic. I remember him writing about Roles via Moose some time ago (while he was with the BBC...
• Commented on I love pre-modern Perl and so should you, my introduction
  That is funny, I didn't mean to put POE in the "modern" camp so much as to suggest Moose appears to be the next fad after POE....
• Commented on I love pre-modern Perl and so should you, my introduction
  Yes Moose offers much more then Class::MethodMaker which really just provides easy getter/setter support. I've looked at Moose quite a few times, I also review the code being done by other projects at my company. While it all looks interesting,...
• Posted I love pre-modern Perl and so should you, my introduction to Core Perl

  My name is David Shultz, I've been working with Perl since the late 1990's where I live in wonderful Portland, Oregon. I'm self taught, I code because I love the challenges and excitement it provides. I got my first job as a programmer working for a small porn company, then a small spam…

Comment Threads

• Perrin Harkins commented on Is the pro/con "Modern Perl" divide a symptom of Steve Yegge's "software political axis"?

  Yes, Modern Perl is a poor description of what the argument has been about. Most of the stuff in your Modern Perl book is totally uncontroversial at this point.

• shaun.griffith.1964 commented on Is the pro/con "Modern Perl" divide a symptom of Steve Yegge's "software political axis"?

  "With this framing, embracing Modern Perl is indicative of a lower risk-tolerance and a desire for more safety in software development, while objecting to it shows a willingness to accept more risk in exchange for lower overhead."

  Do you have that backwards? Objectors to Modern Perl want the Devil They Know, while embracers prefer to try something else. More like conservatives vs. liberals. Both may think they are going down the low risk path, but have different risk profiles. A safe approach for one is not a safe approach for the other.
  

• Perrin Harkins commented on Is the pro/con "Modern Perl" divide a symptom of Steve Yegge's "software political axis"?

  True, you could read it that way. Avoiding change is a way of avoiding risk. However, the change in this case is all about increasing safety in software terms. Some people would view it as giving up some liberty in exchange for more safety, and how you feel about that depends on how unsafe things look to you without it.

  This may just mean that the analogy doesn't fit the situation though.

• Ether commented on Let's try this again

  > I've had all the features Moo(se) offers and much more for a very long time.

  I think Mithaldu was asking *how* you have those features, that is, how you have solved these problems. I'm curious as well.

• Ether commented on Let's try this again

  Mostly I was looking for clarification of this comment:

  > I've had all the features Moo(se) offers and much more for a very long time.

  But if you could elaborate specifically on lazily-loaded attributes, that would be a good start to the discussion!