Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

State of the Onion 7

Posted by michael on Thu Jul 17, 2003 07:35 AM
from the cry-cry-cry dept.
chromatic writes "One of the highlights of every OSCON is Larry Wall's annual State of the Onion address, covering Perl, philosophy, linguistics, music, theology, science, and usually a few other things thrown in for good measure. His talk from OSCON 2003, State of the Onion 7, is now online."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • "I'm really, really excited about what is happening with Perl this year. And I'd like to announce that, after lengthy negotiations, Guido and I have finally decided...


    heh...polly wanna cracker?

  • My experience (Score:5, Insightful)

    by m00nun1t (588082) on Thursday July 17 2003, @07:43AM (#6460051) Homepage
    I read this first page, thinking "this is quite amusing". I think got to the bottom, and saw it was 11 pages long. I don't think I've *ever* read something 11 pages long online in my life. The end of page 1 he's on about deconstructionism. I skip randomly to page 7. First paragraph:
    "Let's take another look at the pink tennis court. I mean, the universal architectural diagram. It really isn't quite as universal as I've made it out to be. First, let's get rid of the pink."

    This is the thoughts of the man behind perl. This explains a *lot* about perl.
    • by teromajusa (445906) on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:33AM (#6460262)
      Yeah, it does. Hard to follow at times, but very clever. Would you rather he just struted around the stage saying "developers developers developers"?
    • You're new here, aren't you? He has been making these SotA speeches for several years now, and the scattershot, surrealist, postmodern Zippy the Pinhead tone to them has become more or less a trademark of them.

      I have no idea if Larry Wall is like this all the time, but in his annual State of the Onion speech, what you see here is normal, and I think generally seen as just a fun aspect of Perl culture. YMMV.

    • by abulafia (7826) on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:48AM (#6460340)
      You've unintentionally nailed a fairly deep truth about both Larry and Perl.

      Both are very, very amusing/accessible, and very complex.

      If you skip around in an attempt to "get" either of them, looking for an executive summary, you end up walking away scratching your head, because neither was "designed" (although Larry would have no trouble with that word, I do) that way. They both evolved (and now I'd really wonder what Larry would say to *that*).

      But if you give a little time towards trying to understand them, both are hugely rewarding, make you think, and have proven themselves extremely useful.

      The "peeling an onion" metaphor is is especially apt - there's always something new to learn.
    • Re:My experience (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Mesozoic44 (646282) on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:50AM (#6460351)
      Well - I'm not fond of Perl (although I do see its power) but I did hear this talk at OSCON and it was one of the most playful and thoughtful talks I've heard in a while. Not thoughtful as in George Steiner's musings on postmodernism - but thoughtful in that he was teasing and suprising the audience so that they were completely engaged. It was sort of like watching a magic act where rabbits were being pulled out of hats at unexpected angles. I think what you're missing in the written text is the timing and tone of voice that he used - sorry you weren't there. It was fun.

      This explains a *lot* about perl. . I thought the same thing in two ways: (1) Perl is a motley and this shows why; (2) Perl needed someone like Wall for the community to form. Constructing both a language and community is more like performance art than an exercise in BNF. In general the audience enjoys the performance when the performer is also engaged - and I suspect he was having a blast.

      If you like your philosophy written more seriously - please take some Tristan Tzara [cwd.co.uk] as an antidote.

  • by cwernli (18353) on Thursday July 17 2003, @07:43AM (#6460052) Homepage

    Is Larry a slashdot regular ? :)

    Now, some of you young folks are too steeped in postmodernism to know anything about postmodernism, so let's review. Postmodernism in its most vicious form started out with the notion that there exist various cultural constructs, or texts, or memes, that allow some human beings to oppress other human beings. Of course, in Soviet Russia it's the other way around. Which is why they managed to deconstruct themselves, I guess.

  • Anyone else expecting a link to a cover story from The Onion [theonion.com]?
  • Ponie (Score:4, Informative)

    by radio4fan (304271) on Thursday July 17 2003, @07:53AM (#6460084)

    To be sure, none of them are good reasons, but I'm told it will make the London.pm'ers deliriously happy if I say, "I want a Ponie".
    And I do want a Ponie.

    For those who are wondering, a 'pony' is cockney rhyming slang for crap:
    Pony and trap: crap.
    • Re:Ponie (Score:3, Informative)

      It's also twenty five quid. Like a monkey, a pony, a bluey, a score, a ton, and so on..
    • Re:Ponie (Score:4, Informative)

      by blech (8859) on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:07AM (#6460148) Homepage
      On the London.pm IRC channel, people talk a lot about wanting ponies, especially when people are (or are percieved to be) upset.

      "I wanna pony!"
      "Here, stroke the lovely pony."
      "Pony drop!" - lots of ponies for the terminally stressed.

      The origins of the phrase are lost in the mists of time. However, it's possible that someone was acting quite a lot like a seven year old at the time.
  • Funny, I saw no statements from T. Herman Zweibel regarding the state of The Onion...
  • by mfh (56) on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:02AM (#6460126) Journal
  • my favorite (Score:3, Funny)

    by squarefish (561836) * on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:06AM (#6460144)
    'state of the onion' address is here [theonion.com]

    Boy, was this right on target or what?
  • Cheap (Score:2, Insightful)

    What a cheap comment. Who modded this to +5, are we suddenly all Perl haters too ?

    I don't know Perl, but I know I like the text and I get his points. It makes me consider studying Perl.

    There is some really interesting low level language stuff going on. State of the art I suspect.

    You sir, are part of the ungrateful and you are certainly unwilling to get any clue about the article at all. You only produce a cheap flamebait...
  • by Captain Large Face (559804) on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:12AM (#6460168) Homepage
    In his speech Wall referred to an attempt by Python to attempt to buy a high powered regular expression engine from a small African nation. This statement was later noted to be incorrect.
    • In his speech Wall referred to an attempt by Python to attempt to buy a high powered regular expression engine from a small African nation. This statement was later noted to be incorrect.


      But it's technically accurate, because he said that the Ebonians said so.
  • I still maintain that whoever wrote this MUST have worked in IT.

    We the unwilling,
    led by the unknowing,
    are doing the impossible
    for the ungrateful.
    We have done so much for so long with so little
    We are now qualified to do anything with nothing.
  • by kars (100858) on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:18AM (#6460194) Homepage
    If you feed one of these diagrams to a black hole, it turns into a piece of spaghetti.

    But let's not, and say we did.



    For God's sake, give this man back his caffeine!
  • Hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gowen (141411) <gwowen@gmail.com> on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:21AM (#6460219) Homepage Journal
    Dry, funny, in touch with hacker culture, informed, astutely political, funny, broadly educated, an enthralling speaker, a brilliant coder and funny again...

    Larry Wall is everything that Eric Raymond believes himself to be.
    • Re:Hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Artifex (18308) on Thursday July 17 2003, @11:41AM (#6462357) Journal
      Larry Wall is everything that Eric Raymond believes himself to be.


      They're rather more like the Wozniak and Jobs of the computer worl- oh, wait, guess I can't say that. I'll say it anyway.

      Seriously, though, both of these guys are very important to the present and future of computer programming. However, they fill different niches, much like the two Steves. They're not in direct competition. They're both visionaries, but one is more apt to build tools and the other is more apt to evangelize, in order to see their visions come true. I don't know these guys in real life, but I would be surprised to find any enmity between them, which I'd expect to find if one of their egos got deflated by the other's abilities.

      A guy tried to impress me once by saying he once worked for or with ESR in some fashion. He couldn't explain exactly what he did or learned from the experience, so I treated it as starry-eyed syndrome or self-ego-building and ignored it. After all, when you work for an evangelist, your time is spent pushing the vision. It's hard to easily point to projects being done now and say that the Cathedral and the Bazaar and Magic Cauldron essays were directly responsible, but their perceivable impact will build over time. Oh, and there's something about him and open source, too, (whatever that is)...

      The people I actually look up to when it comes to programming, on the other hand, almost always know perl, or at least feel inadequate if they don't. While it's not hard, learning it is an indication that you're serious about what you're doing. Larry's tools incorporate his ideas about how things should be done, (or that there's really not any one way some things have to be done, actually) and that invites quicker uptake on the part of people just trying to get things done.

      (I'm only a dilettante, myself, but even I've been affected by Mr. Wall, anyway - my worthless claim to relevance, when I futilely try to impress people with name-dropping, is that I emailed Kibo when I was a kid asking about his usenet-searching script, and he told me this Larry guy had a new language, and I should talk to him for details on how to parse it. If only I was as willing to learn at the time as Larry always has seemed to be, to teach! Which is yet another trait he seems to share with Mr. Wozniak.)

          • Re:Hmmm (Score:3, Informative)

            He's writing a book entitled The Art Of Unix Programming [catb.org] and sets out a standard for those he deems wise enough to help

            "senior cadre with established public reputations for excellence across the entire Unix community will be directly quoted in the body of the book."

            adding that

            "senior contributors must not only be the best, but be known to be the best."

            I don't think theres any doubt he is numbering himself amongst the qualified, since he writes

            "I have done the heavy lifting in the writing and research

  • by Christianfreak (100697) on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:23AM (#6460227) Homepage Journal
    Geez as open-minded as people on Slashdot claim to be, anytime something different comes along let the flames fly!! You don't have to like Perl, but why flame Larry for that? How many of you built a an extremely popular programing language from the ground up. I mean surely Perl must have gotten something right or growing numbers of people wouldn't have used it for the last 14? years and ported it to more platforms than I can count.

    Sure Larry can be a bit eccentric but he's mildly amusing and he has some really good ideas about language design that challange the current ones. He's also willing to learn from good ideas from other languages (Creating a VM for example for multiple languages to target to).

    And another thing, the whole "You can't read Perl or figure out old programs" bit is getting old. You can do that in ANY language. You can also follow some generally accepted formatting rules and your code will look just fine and be readable by any halfway experienced coder.

    Rant off.
    • Just think how bad it could be. The next person to flame Mr. Wall gets to sit through a keynote speech by Steve Ballmer, complete with monkey dance.
    • by sisukapalli1 (471175) on Thursday July 17 2003, @10:41AM (#6461635)
      And another thing, the whole "You can't read Perl or figure out old programs" bit is getting old. You can do that in ANY language. You can also follow some generally accepted formatting rules and your code will look just fine and be readable by any halfway experienced coder.

      I have written some code in Java and Perl for doing similar stuff (using text templates), and the perl code looks like someone is explaining in plain english. With perl5 and modules from CPAN , one can write very clean code.

      S

    • As far as I can tell from what I've read, Perl 6 is an attempt to make the world's most unreadable language. The purpose of the "mutability" is to allow programmers to change the language on the fly, right? So when you sit down to read a piece of Perl 6 code, first you'll have to figure out what changes were made to the language. It'll be just like LISP macros, except instead of having brackets all over the place you'll have every punctuation symbol in Unicode.
      • Popularity for open source tools has something to do with usefulness, quality, availability (on various platforms) and so on. Unlike both Windows and VB, Perl has never had a significant marketing campaign - it got lucky in the Unix/shell environment, then in hitting the CGI niche in the mid-90s, and then again in hitting the bioinformatics niche in the late 90s (getting lucky this many times begins to look like something other than luck, though).

        I use Perl a lot, and despite the near-vertical learning cu
  • When it comes to these "State of the Onion" speeches Larry Wall gives, he always has a theme. And what he does is actually makes the theme of the talk more prominent than anything he is going to say about the Perl language. Note the first sentence of this year's speech - he says Perl is ok, and now that he's got that out of the way, onto his theme.

    Larry Wall is clearly a genious, and actually has a huge range of interests aside from software. One year, he talked about chemistry. The last time I was at the Open Source conference, he talked about music (and demonstrated his abilities in playing about 30 different instruments). I can still remember the puzzled look on many people's faces and some even getting up and leaving. So this year, the theme is jokes ...

    For the harcore Perl person, I guess the key is to look carefully for anything related to the future of the language in between all the silliness. Maybe he's trying to tell everyone there are a great many things to life outside programming. More likely he's just got a twisted sense of humor. I found the best thing to do was to kick back and enjoy it for the entertainment value - a relatively tough concept when you're not seeing it in person and only looking at a printout though :-(

  • by Qbertino (265505) on Thursday July 17 2003, @09:17AM (#6460534)
    ... I don't quite understand you but that's ok. Just please don't ever offer me anything of the stuff you smoke. :-)
  • Larry funny? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Manax (41161) * <toertel-slashdot@Nospam.manax.org> on Thursday July 17 2003, @09:45AM (#6460876) Homepage
    I'm suprised, but I didn't really find it that funny, or that informative. Most of the humor struck me as quite sophmoric. Which, in turns, suprised me that many on /. think he is funny, then didn't suprise me quite so much....

    Perhaps his prior "State of the Onion"s are better... can't say I've read them.

    I don't know Mr. Wall, but from the way others gush about him, I suspect he is an interesting fellow, and I certainly love Perl... but his humor doesn't appear to be his strong point. :(

    His talk really could have been only 10 seconds:
    o The movers of the world tend to be the unreasonable.
    o Deconstructionism is about understanding and breaking down "oppressive" memes.
    o Postmodernism is about using a common word to mean its opposite.
    o Perl5 is done, a new Perl 5 based on Parrot will be called Ponie and will be the transition step to Perl 6, which will also be based on Parrot. (Which everyone who cares about Perl already knew anyway.)

    If this a typical "State of the Onion", I hope the organizers cut him down to those ten seconds sooner, rather than later...

  • The State of the... (Score:4, Informative)

    by freeBill (3843) on Thursday July 17 2003, @09:49AM (#6460928) Homepage

    ...Onion was good, but to hear it you had to sit through five other "State of" speeches which were terminally boring. (Well, the "State of the Snake" wasn't boring, but its schizotypic references to the "Pythonic way" of doing things went a long way toward explaining why the Python community is so paranoid.)

    A hidden gem [rubyist.net] appeared later in the week when Yukihiro "Matz" Matsumoto gave his "State of the Corundum" speech. (Actually it wasn't called that. It was called "The Power and Philosophy of Ruby.") The subtitle alone ("how to create babel-17") had the packed room buzzing before he started: "He's going to turn us into uber-assassins with no sense of self!"

    The slides are available online (link above) and are definitely worth taking a look at. He's kinda sensitive about his English, so don't flame him unless your Japanese is better. Matz's philosophy is also guided by this maxim: "Be humble, be minor, be happy."

        • Have you learned a non-phonetic alphabet before?

          I've learned enough to know how difficult it would be to be fluent. Why do they teach Chinese children pinyin? Why do the Japanese use hiragana, katakana, and romaji if kanji is so superior?

          I believe that once mastered, non-phonetic alphabets allow for faster and more accurate transfer of information.

          Faster, I might give you, but given the redundancy, interoperability, and modularity in phonetic alphabets I think that accuracy is not on your side. E

  • by djeaux (620938) on Thursday July 17 2003, @09:55AM (#6460997) Homepage Journal
    It's worth reading to page 7 just to see Larry color the "impossible object oriented" widget. And then add the "universal clarification tool."

    Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but in all those pink tennis court diagrams was the concept of Parrot as a universal interpreter for Perl 5, Perl 6 & a heap pile of other languages. While it's an interesting concept in & of itself, it suggests to me that the advent of Perl 6 will not mean the demise of Perl 5, which is something I find quite comforting. And then Wall takes the "impossible object" widget, turns it into a comb & uses that to illustrate Parrot. Whoa!

    This was the most fun read I've had in a while.

  • .Net competitor? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by AnEmbodiedMind (612071) on Thursday July 17 2003, @10:34AM (#6461545)
    This is pretty interesting... It looks like they are making a sort of "Common Language Runtime" out of Parrot, and letting it run various languages on top of it.

    I found it interesting that Larry didn't mention how this is positioned (philosophically, or technically) in relation to .Net which is offering a similar sort of framework.

    I guess one big difference here will be that you probably wont have to compile your programs, even down to byte-code - it will just do it on the fly. (At least it seems that it will be that way, given the current nature of perl)

    What could be cool though would be being able to call code from python, perl, php, java, and whatever from within your app (which could be in any of these languages too). But I guess that is just the whole .Net buzz anyway - Theoretically at least.

  • I like Perl (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ajs318 (655362) <sd_resp2&earthshod,co,uk> on Thursday July 17 2003, @10:53AM (#6461781)
    I know this is going to look like heresy, but I actually like Perl.

    Perl remembers that you still have to use functions to cause things to happen. According to your fancy object-oriented stuff -- Java, Ruby and the like -- the recipe for making beans on toast goes like this;
    dinner = new Meal();
    dinner.Plate.Dirty = false;
    dinner.Plate.Diameter = Metric.mmToIn(250);
    toast = new Array[0..1] of bread.slice;
    toast.Shade = GOLDEN_BROWN;
    toast->cook();
    beans.InCan = false;
    beans.Temp = Metric.CtoF(70);
    beans->cook();
    dinner += toast;
    dinner += beans;
    dinner->eat();
    At least Perl remembers that you still have to execute functions. A saucepan on a stove is a function: you put something into it, it gets changed in some way {in this case it gets hotter}, and you take something out of it. Now, beans do have a measurable temperature, but to me at least it doesn't make any sense to imagine sliding the thermometer to cause the temperature of the beans to change. I expect to have to call a function to cause the beans to get hot.

    Speaking of functions, I do love the way you call functions in Perl; you don't need to know or care in advance how many arguments your function is going to need, nor what to call them, because they just come through as one array which is always called @_. Oh, and Perl {and this definitely influenced PHP} indicates variable types with a prefix, so even within speech marks, it can spot a variable and insert the value.

    PHP is a bit easier for creating web pages. It automates some of the things Perl makes you do for yourself {like grabbing form variables and function parameters} and you don't have to remember to send a MIME type, but comparing PHP to Perl is like comparing DJ's record decks to a Dansette autochanger. A DJ needs a level of control over the record playing process that automation would take away. Someone who just wants to listen to a stack of records from beginning to end and doesn't mind waiting a little while between songs doesn't need that level of control.

    Another "feature" of Perl is that it's possible to write a piece of code you completely understand one day, and it to be so perfect, crystal-clear and obvious that commenting would spoil it; yet a mere 24 hours later, that same code whose beauty you appreciated and with which you Became One, has turned to gibberish.
    • PHP is a bit easier for creating web pages. It automates some of the things Perl makes you do for yourself {like grabbing form variables and function parameters} and you don't have to remember to send a MIME type, but

      Pick HTML::Mason [masonhq.com] for doing this and much more with mod_perl and apache [apache.org]
  • by mihalis (28146) on Thursday July 17 2003, @11:50AM (#6462486) Homepage
    Larry has an ulcer, poor health insurance and low income. Perl6 is large, complicated and not done yet. But they'd like to, you know, just include a little universal scripting language engine in there, as well as all the actual Perl stuff.
    It's A Beautiful Mind all over again. Perl 6 is the Riemann Hypothesis. Larry Wall is John Nash, except there may never be a Nobel prize for scripting languages. It's going to kill him or drive him mad. Forget about killing Microsoft, how do we keep Larry alive and sane?
  • by Animats (122034) on Thursday July 17 2003, @01:29PM (#6463609) Homepage
    Well, now we have the Java virtual machine, the Microsoft .NET VM, and the Parrot VM, each of which supports multiple languages.

    It's interesting that these virtual machines exist primarily for strategic reasons. Each group wants to control their run-time platform. So they have to insert an interpretive layer between their language and the operating system. Why? Because the operating system is usually from Microsoft, and Microsoft keeps changing their API to lock people into Microsoft products.

    It's worth noting that taking this route implies a battle with Microsoft. They hate it when someone puts a portable platform on top of their OS. Look what they did to Java, Netscape, Borland... This decision puts Perl on a collision course with Microsoft.

    • Re:seriously (Score:2, Interesting)

      I tend to agree. Start again without all of the existing syntax baggage. Being able to reuse exsiting perl libraries would be, imho, the only requirement for a next version of perl. Larry, just write a new language the way you though it should be done, don't "waste" time building more onto the already over complex and weird perl structure you have already.
      • Guess this poster (and a few people with moderation points as well) doesn't realize that thats pretty much what they're doing with Perl 6. They're not throwing out the whole language, but they're cleaning up some of the syntax, improving object support and redesigning the engine itself.
    • Re:seriously (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Branc0 (580914) on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:09AM (#6460159) Homepage Journal
      why doesn't he aknowledge that Perl has reached its goals long ago and give up development..

      Maybe because the goals evolve has the language evolves..

    • Re:seriously (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Ender Ryan (79406) on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:23AM (#6460225) Journal
      Seriously, why the hell was the parent modded +5 insightful? Unbelievable....

      Languages evolve, and that's all there is to it. Should development of C, C++, PHP, Python, Ruby, etc. be stopped because they have acheived their initial goals?

      No, of course not. Let them evolve, as they all have done and continue to do.

    • Re:seriously (Score:4, Insightful)

      by skryche (26871) on Thursday July 17 2003, @08:25AM (#6460233) Homepage
      why doesn't he aknowledge that Perl has reached its goals long ago and give up development.

      Maybe he likes developing Perl.

    • Seriously, though, didn't he have anything better to do?

      What, better than making geek jokes? Are you mad? Perl-ease! ;-)

      J.

    • "And, golly, why break the talk up into 11 "pages" in the first place? For better advertising for O'Reilly, perhaps? Or do the webmasters think that we can't handle a long vertical scroll bar? Give it to me straight up!"

      Well, you could always click on the link to the single page printable version [perl.com].