Audio Stack Exchange On Twitter: Cool Edit Pro Alternative For Mac

StackEdit is a free, open-source Markdown editor based on PageDown, the Markdown library used by Stack Overflow and the other Stack Exchange sites.

• Audio Stack Exchange On Twitter: Cool Edit Pro Alternative For Mac Free
• Audio Stack Exchange On Twitter: Cool Edit Pro Alternative For Mac Mac

Quote: Please clear the Media Cache (keeping Premiere Pro closed). Find instructions here: FAQ: Navigate to the Media Cache location as specified in the Premiere Pro preferences and rename the folders. MAC: Premiere Pro menuPreferencesMedia Windows: Edit MenuPreferencesMedia Please reply if your issue gets resolved after trying these steps. NOTE: Premiere Pro will conform all files after opening any/all project(s) and will generate the peak file for the audio. This might take long depending upon the number of Media used in the project(s).

On, you can create your own to showcase your achievements and advance your career. One option you have when creating a Developer Story is to add tags you would like to work with or would not like to work with: This offers us an opportunity to examine the opinions of hundreds of thousands of developers. There are many ways to measure the popularity of a language; for example, we’ve often used to measure such trends. But this dataset is a rare way to find out what technologies people tend to dislike, when given the opportunity to say so on their CV. (I posted some of this analysis on, but this post is updated with both a more recent dataset and more visualizations and explorations). Programming languages As a measure of how polarizing each tag is, we’ll look at what fraction of the time it appears in someone’s Disliked tags compared to how often it appears in either someone’s Liked or Disliked tags. Thus, 50% would mean a tag was disliked exactly as often as it was liked, while 1% means there were 99 people who liked it for each one who disliked it.

1. Oct 15, 2012. Lesser used DAW which was until very recently a Mac-only piece of Software. I used FL Studio for a long time but had to make a change once I had to pick. Even came up with some pretty cool songs (IMO) with some friends. I mentioned Logic merely because it's Apple's in-house pro audio software.
2. Stack Exchange network consists of 174 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers. Visit Stack Exchange.

(We used the empirical Bayes method I describe in to estimate these averages, and to calculate 95% credible intervals). Let’s start by looking at a selected list of programming languages (as opposed to platforms like Android or libraries like JQuery), all of which have at least 2,000 mentions on Developer Stories. The most disliked languages, by a fairly large margin, are Perl, Delphi, and VBA. They’re followed by PHP, Objective-C, Coffeescript, and Ruby.

On our team we’re certainly happy to see that R is the least disliked programming language, relative to the number of people who liked it. If you’ve read some of our other posts about the growing and shrinking programming languages, you might notice that the least disliked tags tend to be fast-growing ones. R, Python, Typescript, Go, and Rust are all fast-growing in terms of Stack Overflow activity (we’ve specifically explored and before) and all are among the least polarizing languages. Similarly, many of the shrinking tags, such as Perl, Objective-C, and Ruby, are ones we’ve to be among the fastest-shrinking tags on the site. We can examine this by comparing the size and growth of each language to the% of people disliking it, with orange points representing the most disliked languages.

To keep our analysis consistent with the last few posts, we’ll limit the statistics to high-income countries (such as the US, UK, Germany, and Canada). Generally there is a relationship between a tag’s growth and how often it’s disliked. Almost everything disliked by more than 3% of stories mentioning it is shrinking in Stack Overflow traffic (except for the quite polarizing VBA, which is steady or slightly growing). And the least-disliked tags— R, Rust, Typescript and Kotlin— are all among the fast-growing tags (Typescript and Kotlin growing so quickly they had to be truncated in the plot).

The target market developed from pupils as well as home consumers has got the excellent multifunction laser printer of fantastic top quality at an affordable price.

One tag that stands out is the functional language Clojure; almost nobody expresses dislike for it, but it’s still among the most rapidly shrinking (based on, it only started shrinking in the last year or so). Another exception is MATLAB, which is shrinking despite not many people expressing dislike of it. This may indicate a limitation of the data for measuring sentiment: while any web developers might have an opinion on PHP, C# or Ruby, people who don’t work in data analysis have little reason to express an opinion on MATLAB. (This is probably part of the reason R is so rarely mentioned in “Dislikes” as well.) We’re not necessarily suggesting a causal relationship, where tags being disliked by a component of programmers leads to them being abandoned. Another possibility is that people feel comfortable expressing their dislike publicly if they sense that the language is already shrinking in popularity.

It’s also conceivable that developers often use this field to note technologies they used to work with, but no longer do. This would lead to a natural progression of “replaced” technologies ending up in the Disliked field. Most disliked and liked tags The above analysis considers only programming languages, not operating systems, platforms, or libraries. What are the most disliked technologies overall? To focus on large technologies for which we have enough data, we limited them to technologies mentioned at least 1,000 times.

Several are Microsoft technologies, particularly Internet Explorer and Visual Basic, as well as the “Microsoft” tag (“Apple” also makes the list, though it’s not as dramatically disliked). For the majority of people who dislike Flash. Older languages such as COBOL, Fortran, and Pascal also make appearances. It’s worth emphasizing again that this is no indictment of the technologies, their quality, or their popularity.

It is simply a measurement of what technologies stir up strong negative feelings in at least a subset of developers who feel comfortable sharing this publicly. We could also zoom in on the most uniformly popular technologies, those that are almost never disliked.

(This time, since highly-liked tags are more common, we’re focusing only on technologies mentioned at least 10,000 times.) Git might be a source of frustration to many developers (it certainly is for me!), but it’s rare that people admit it on their resume, as it’s the most lopsidedly-liked tag in our Developer Stories. R makes this list, but it’s not the only data-science-related tag that’s uncontroversial; the machine learning tag was liked by 23 thousand people and was quite rarely disliked.

Tags such as Python-3.X, CSS3 and HTML5 could indicate that developers rarely specify that they dislike a specific version of a technology (even if they specify). And of course,.

Network of polarizing tags We can combine all these tags into one story by organizing them into a network. In a recent post, to represent the overall software ecosystem.

If we color the nodes according to how disliked each tag is, we can understand what parts of the ecosystem are more controversial than others. By laying out Developer Story tags into sub-ecosystems, this network tells a story about what types of tags tend to be polarizing. There are clusters of polarizing tags within the sub-ecosystems for Microsoft (centered around C# and.NET), PHP (along with WordPress and Drupal), and mobile development (particularly Objective-C). Within the cluster of operating systems (lower right), we can see that systems such as OSX and especially Windows have their detractors, but tags like Linux, Ubuntu and Unix don’t. Rivalries If someone likes a particular tag, are there any tags they’re unusually likely to dislike? We can measure this using a between the appearance of a particular liked tag. (When computing these correlations, we considered only people who had disliked at least one tag.) This highlights some of the “rivalries” underlying the software ecosystem: Linux and OSX vs Windows, Git vs SVN, vim vs emacs and (unsurprisingly to me) R vs SAS.

Most of these pairs don’t represent “opposite” technologies, but instead reflect two approaches to similar problems. Many of them suggest a progression from a formerly popular technology to a more modern one (SVN replaced by Git, XML replaced by JSON, VB replaced by C#). This makes sense in terms of what people would list on a resume; it’s common for developers to specify that they’d rather not work with something they consider outdated.

Conclusion I don’t have any interest in “language wars,” and I don’t have any judgment of users who share technologies they’d rather not work with. Thinking about how polarizing Microsoft technologies often are does encourage me to share my personal experience. I’ve been a lifelong Mac and UNIX user, and nearly all of my programming in college and graduate school was centered around Python and R. Despite that, I was happy to join a company with a.NET stack, and I’m glad I did— because I loved the team, the product, and the data.

I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m glad I defined myself in terms of what work I wanted to do, and not something I wanted to avoid. If you’re interested in sharing what technologies you like and dislike, and perhaps find the next step in your career, you can. Want to work with the technologies you love? Find your next move on, where you can search by tech you like working with.

I think you’re fundamentally misinterpreting these data. People don’t use that feature just because they “dislike a language”, they do it because they have observed (either in SO question lists, or in the typical volume of jobs on offer, or some similar collection of material) a disproportionately high amount of material on languages they’re not interested in. For example, I am almost constantly spammed with C# job information, for no apparent reason, so I tend to make sure to “ignore” C# on job sites with a tagging system — that doesn’t mean I utterly despise C#, just that I’m not interested in it right now. On the other hand, I really would not want to work in C, but since nobody ever tries to get me to do so, I don’t bother adding it to ignore lists. Your conclusions above seem to ignore this factor and just treat users’ tag selections as a straight-up indication of what languages they like the most.

I understand that hypothesis, but does it fit the data above? If so we’d have expected large and growing tags to be especially disliked, but the third image shows shrinking tags are disliked much more often. As another example, four of the most common languages for Stack Overflow job listings are C#, Java, Javascript and Python (you can count them in Jobs search, e.g. For Java: ), while the more polarizing Perl and Delphi are much more obscure (currently 4 jobs tagged Delphi). It’s always worth taking these results in context, but I think the context is as I described it late in the post: people tend to dislike tags they consider outdated. Here’s the thing.

Your example with Clojure highlights this perfectly, so let’s look at that for an example. First of all, why are Clojure tags on SO shrinking?

It could easily be argued that for this and many others in the newer crop of technologies, people increasingly turn to communities for that technology instead of the generalist resource of StackOverflow; this is amplified by the lack of presence of the language in SO to begin with, meaning people are less likely to start adding questions here as well, much less looking to it as an authority. Second of all, why are Clojure tags seemingly not represented that much in people’s resumes? Perhaps because they don’t see it as a marketable skill, more than because they don’t have negative or positive opinions of it. It’s not one they’d expect to see at any given work environment, so they leave it off.

I’ve noticed this trending pattern with each ‘statistical analysis’ post from StackOverflow – you extrapolate patterns of behaviour of devs on SO as being representative of all developers, when in fact it’s becoming more likely that SO has come to represent a repository of common problems more than a repository of common popularity, and that is a distinction I suspect is very important to address when making broad conclusions about the data. The context of SO makes far more assumptions than you’d like to claim. This is an important question and we consider it a lot (for example, I addressed it in the final two sections of this post: ).

It’s important to consider and be upfront about such caveats and confounding factors. But I feel that the majority of the variation we examine is useful and informative: while visits to Stack Overflow aren’t a perfectly random sample of what developers are using, they’re representative enough to draw conclusions from.

But we don’t have to go on opinions. The hypothesis that Stack Overflow data is biased, in a way that makes it not useful for this kind of analysis, is one that can be tested. Try making predictions about how Stack Overflow data would differ from other data sources, and see if they’re borne out.

Consider Clojure vs Scala. The Stack Overflow traffic data above (and in similar posts) suggests that Clojure has a smaller userbase than Scala, and has been staying level or shrinking while Scala is growing rapidly (particularly within high-income countries). We’re not the only dataset that shows this: it’s also borne out qualitatively by Google Trends data ( ) and GitHub activity ( ). (In some data Clojure looks more flat than shrinking, but that could be explained by the fact that we’re looking at% of total Stack Overflow visits, and indeed the “shrinking” in our own data started only in the last year). After the fact, could you construct a story why all three metrics are wrong, and don’t represent the true amount of Clojure development? But did you expect them to in advance?

And what is the evidence on the other side, that justifies jumping through hoops to explain why all the data is pointing in one direction? This is an important self-test when we’re criticizing a data source: see if we can make predictions about how it will be wrong.

I once encountered a Haskell programmer who was sure that Haskell questions were underrepresented on Stack Overflow, and gave the example that while Lua and Haskell had the same number of users, Haskell SO questions were much more scarce than Lua. He proceeded to construct a convincing-sounding story as to why Lua devs may need to ask SO questions while Haskell had other ways of getting answers.

But he was going off of his anecdotal impression, which was in fact quite wrong: there are regularly twice as many SO Haskell questions asked per month as Lua. If his mental model of the programming ecosystem wasn’t even able to predict existing facts, why expect it to have hidden insights into under- and over- represented technologies? I get a lot of hypotheses wrong myself. For example, when I first saw that the% of new Ruby questions was declining in the last few years, I was surprised.

I theorized that it might be because so many questions were already answered that people were visiting existing ones rather than asking new ones. But instead of just deciding the metric was useless and trusting my own story, I looked at the data, and in fact visits to existing Ruby questions have been declining just as fast as new questions have. (In fact, it’s almost never true that question views are rising while new questions are declining, except for short time periods). I could tell a new story about how Ruby developers were particularly unlikely to visit existing questions.

But wouldn’t you start getting a little suspicious of the post-hoc additions, and start thinking Ruby may actually be shrinking? I’ve sometimes heard the response of “well, all data sources- Stack Overflow, GitHub, Google Trends, are biased, so we should throw them all out.” But when we throw out all our data, we don’t get left with a perfectly unbiased answer: we get left with nothing but our own biases and subjective impressions (“I’m sure Clojure is growing, I’ve got two friends that both just started using it!”) Data has its problems, but it’s the only game in town.

There’s also some odd cases I “like” the Internet-Explorer tag not because I like IE, but because I have to deal with it I’m sadly overly well versed in its quirks and want to ensure I get exposure to the ones I’ve yet to discover. However even though I have 2 badges for IE and IE8 on StackOverflow they are not really the badges I’m “proud” of.

😉 Hmm, David writes below that these tags are purely from the developer story not from ignored tags/watched tags on StackOverflow so uhm yeah likely a different set of reasons for liking/not liking. Brainfuck is a programming language, that is the whole point of the brainfuck exercice, to create a programming language. When I read the question Brainfuck was the first thing to pop into my mind. I do not dislike Brainfuck, however it is the last programming language I would want to have to use, by far. I would much rather code in assembly. Thankfully nobody is forcing me to use it. Does it mean I dislike it?

I’m not sure – there is a fine distinction that I missed at first. By the way, I have programmed in all 4 top hated languages (although not extensively). I don’t think they really deserve their top 4 place, especially perl. Granted, it is painful to grasp everything happening around @, $, hashes and whatever, and I never totally did, however when it is is used in what it was build for – processing text data – it can shine.

It just has a nasty learning curve, and that’s most probably why it got taken over by PHP. With PHP I have a love-hate relationship, it gets things done, nothing less, but unfortunately nothing more either. Delphi I kind of liked (Pascal Script, actually, but close enough, IMHO). It’s quite verbose. Unfortunately not the best kind of verbose – more like inelegant, repetitive words when I would much rather use braces, commas, operators and then add a few comments in the spared space.

For some reason, I tend to write huge functions in these languages. Anyway, I’m sure there is much worse out there. How about, COBOL. I would guess it’s considered dead but I’m sure there are a few banks somewhere still running it. It’s actually likable too, but more like how I would enjoy a visit to the museum and seeing historic machines. They don’t really teach the real evils at college – such as criticizing your manager or boss, publicly giving your opinion, publicly offering suggestions to do things differently, hitting on your coworker, being late or sick during probation.

Nobody really cares about GOTO (not sincerely, anyway). They’re just pretending that they can make somehow turn people into good programmers by teaching them such rules. Nasty programmer will find other ways to mess up, and skillful programmers will know when to use a GOTO.

I was also taught COBOL – that was like 15 years ago. I didn’t really enjoy using it, nor was I impressed by it in any way, but I still think it’s nice to learn older languages and I think there is something to learn from it. For the first chart, how did you incorporate the percentage of dislikes versus the percentage of popularity? R may be the most non-disliked, but is that only due to the lack of people who would ever think about R putting it there?

Sure is it growing – but on a pound-per-pound basis what is the outcome? I’m wondering if there could be a more in-depth data science blog?

Where you talk about WHY you did what you did? I’d also like to see some unstructured analytics alongside these topics as SO has a TON of text data attached to these tags. This article is trash. Any data scientist drawing some sort of conclusion from this article should simply give up. To dislike something you have to be aware of something, so unless the pool you’re sample consist of people who have experience with ALL these languages, they’re not really qualified to dislike anything, since they are not AWARE. What about Eiffel or Assembly?

Audio Stack Exchange On Twitter: Cool Edit Pro Alternative For Mac Free

Some languages aren’t even popular enough to merit an opinion. Maybe of each language, how many people are happy with the language and how many want to switch away or has switched would be more indicative of what this article was trying to illustrate. If you’re going to represent yourself as “qualified data scientist” on the internet.

Represent at that level. This article belongs on some satire site.

I don’t mind if you discredit plethoras of languages and the professionals that work in them, but have some respect for the field. Discredit them with some sort of meaningful argument, some sort of metric, something that the community can absorb, adapt, and refine, but this?

Audio Stack Exchange On Twitter: Cool Edit Pro Alternative For Mac Mac

Just a massive waste of time. This is effectively a troll against the programic industry, and that’s all it really is. You might as well say “my language is better than yours na na na na”. I guess it depends on how you interpret your system, really. When you are on a primarily compiled, backend-focused architecture (C, C#, Java, etc.), where the “real” workload is done on the server and only some JavaScript snippets are sent to the client to add some interactivity to the webpage here-and-there, the distinction of “code” and “scripts” is, IMO, most definitely accurate. On the other hand, when you are on a full-JS stack, the distinction is irrelevant: there is no “script” and “code” at the same time. I don’t “dislike” Linux but let me give you some perspective.

As a kid my first experience with computers was DOS, then Windows 3.1 etc. Eventually I discovered Linux and learned to use it both for work and personal use and its a perfectly OK alternative operating system that for work at least is better than windows in many ways. But I ‘m not going to lie, having to use the CLI to do things always felt (and still feels) like a step back to me. The same with the originally unfamiliar structure of Linux, I can use it just fine but the Windows structure still “feels” like the right one.

Now don’t get me wrong I know why the structure is different and I don’t mind using the CLI instead of a GUI but that’s just me and I can understand with ease someone who looks at these things and has a response along the lines of: ”%^&$@ that this is 2017 I don’t want to have to commit CLI commands to memory! ” and that causes them to dislike the OS.

Well I dislike Perl and I have been coding for 30+ years I suppose my dislike of Perl could correlate with an inability to code, yet I still manage to get the gigs I definitely went through the Perl phase with everyone else. It’s a fine scripting language and should be used as such. I would never want to work on a large project written in Perl NOT because the language isn’t capable, but because Perl coders (I once was one) have a tendency to try and do everything on a single line or regex everything.

It’s not Perl’s fault totally and sure these things could be enforced in code reviews, but they aren’t. Literally every Perl project I have inherited from another developer or team has had to be rewritten from scratch.

Because it was faster to rewrite it than to understand all the crazy Perl idioms that were used no using obscure features of a language doesn’t make a person eliteit makes their code hard to maintain. Anyway once I moved to Python there was literally never a need for Perl again And sure Peal could do a lot of the heaving lifting I do with Python, but I’d never in a million years try to maintain a 100,000+ line code based that was written in Perl.

NEVERtried it once with a few thousand line code base. I’m not saying it cant’ be done, but I am saying that I would not enjoy it at all. You are describing bad programming. Every good programmer knows that one of the most important aspects of coding is to make the code readable and readily understandable. You seem to have had the misfortune to inherit the work of smart-alecs that wrote obscure code because they thought it made them look clever. In fact it makes them look like the incompetent, unprofessional idiots that they are.

They probably would be unable to maintain even their own code if they had to come back to it a few months later. Unfortunately Perl, with its great freedom in how things are done, seems to attract that sort of person more than languages like Python where the language offers fewer options, and goes some way to preventing the worst forms of obscurantism. I would not blame the language. I’d blame the managers and team leaders that did not enforce coding standards or, more likely, never put any in place to begin with. Tom I agree, but I ultimately blame both. Look Perl is what it is.

It’s literally a language that powered the web for it’s early life. That alone is impressive. I am not bashing Perl per-say, but I am declaring that there are better alternatives out there for this use case today. Python/Django, Ruby/Rails, etc. Can Perl do all of that? But will that code be as readable/maintainable as say the same application written with Python/Django or Ruby/Rails.

IMHO having used them all. Perl is the hardest to read and maintain in a team of people. The irony in my next statement is that before coming to Python I was appalled that it enforced a white space rule After learning Python and working on larger teams I have come to understand that this is in fact one of my favorite features of the language. Something about writing code that a software engineer from any background can easily read and understand.

Perl is not an easy language on the eyes (yeah yeah that is subjective), but with plenty of experience hiring coders and ramping them up I can honestly say it’s harder with Perl than a language like Python and YES that could be because there are more Python coders these day’s than Perl coders. Python is a great language. It is easier to learn than Perl and does not seem to make people want to write obfuscated code.

Nevertheless Perl is a more powerful and versatile language. In any case our likes and dislikes have little influence. Unless we are lone geniuses or running the company we, as software developers, have to use whatever language or languages our employer has chosen unless it really cannot do the job, in which case we are allowed to suggest alternatives. In the same way Agile methods are imposed on us as the one true way to manage all and every project that can ever be conceived, rather than being used for those projects where it is appropriate, and put aside for those where it is not.

A software developer that intends to do a good job will try to write readable and maintainable code, regardless of language and regardless of whether the company has coding guidelines. I have no time for those “geniuses” that quickly hack together something unmaintainable that more or less works and thereby impress managers that know no better. Having said that it is rarely the un-readability of code that makes for unmaintainable software.

It is almost always quicker to re-implement buggy code than track down its problems and fix them. So long as compilation units (or individual scripts) are reasonably sized that is. Of course the same fools that write obscure code also tend to write 100-page programs.

I have found that it it is the poorly designed architecture of an application that is a bigger problem. Having been denied the use of GOTO, many software designers have instead created Spaghetti from the interactions between modules. Perl is a great general purpose language with tremendously wide applicability. For any development work that does not need such versatility other languages are often easier to learn and use. Take PHP for instance.

It is rather a simple language, but quite elegant. Coming from a long career in software, and having used Perl extensively for about 20 years I learned enough PHP in a day to code up efficient and correct implementations of a couple of complex algorithms. And I am not claiming any exceptional ability. I expect any similarly experienced developer would be able to do the same easily enough Horses for courses yes. Favourite languages okay. But hatred of programming languages.

Maybe some but not Perl. Maybe the author of the article was merely struggling for suitable click-bait to suck people into StackOverflow? Because as a rigorous piece of analysis, the article sucks. The data cannot be trusted and the logic is full of holes. I wonder if he designs software?

Tom I do agree on some points. Perl is a powerful language. But so is Python. If we had this conversation 10 years ago I’d have agreed that Perl was more powerful, today I certainly would not agree with thatthough hands down Perl pawns everyone else when it comes to regular expression IMO. Python has come a long way and as far as power goes I’d probably declare them equals, but one of them is in fact easier to learn and has a more expressive syntax.

So I guess define power? They have both been around since the 80’s. Most people don’t know that about Python. They think it’s a web language, but truthfully it was a science language Bio, and Chem first.

I used it in that capacity for a long time. Then Django came out.

And well the rest is history. Lol Besides if I’m looking for raw power I’d revert back to my C/C day’s or golang.

Man I am loving golang on a few hobby projects. I can’t believe how awesome it is for concurrent programming. But I have to admit I feel like I stepped backwards 10 years on expressive ability with the language.but then Python can’t even really do multithreading programming. I definitely agree with you about Agile being forced as the One.True.Way.

God I hate Agile at times. You are right there are projects that are totally suited fro Agile aka web programming.

Everything else not so much IMHO. You can’t just release a math module early and often and hope to fix the bugs that people find.

And I agree the article may have had some click bait in it. When a person has mastered a language they can do damn near anything in it quickly. And just to ramble a bit. It took a LOT of convincing to get me to start using Python instead of C.and even then I did it by embedding the python interpreter into the application I was working on to provide a scripting interface. And then later exported a lot of those functions to Python code.

It was a molecule modeling package yeah I’m a damn dinosaur. Keep in mind that all these languages are Turing complete. Anything you can do in one you can do in another. (Unless it’s so poorly implemented you crash the machine.) The only real question is how easy it is. Furthermore, if you already code in 3 (from different families) you can pick up any other in a week.

That said, just trying to read someone’s legacy Cobol code from the 60s, let alone change it to get the data you actually want, is enough to give you a headache. Yes, I’m looking at you, HHS.

(Yes, seriously, at the time I looked, the only way to get Medicare data was to run a Cobol program. No SQL, no jquery, no INFORM.

There’s a database back there somewhere, but the only access is through those Cobol programs. Medicare allows users to write programs to access “scrubbed” no personal identifiers data. But only in Cobol. But what are the protocols on their computers?). Another possible explanation is that stack overflow itself selects towards a certain segment of programmers and may not be representative of the industry as a whole. It’s sort of like saying “we surveyed 100 people at our local coffee shop and found that most people enjoy drinking coffee.” The problem then becomes when the lemmings read that and say “Oh, I need to start drinking coffee also.” Personally, I don’t think I’d want to hire anyone that has registered a strong dislike for any language. A smart programmer tries to have as many languages in their toolbox as they can get.

Of course, we all have our favorites, which is usually a function of the kind of programming we do most often as some languages are more suited for certain types of work than others. Personally I learned to dislike Perl once I had to pick up Perl code that other people wrote. I alway’s thought it was a great scripting language and I still feel that it’s an OK scripting language.

But it simply doesn’t compete, in my opinion, on larger projects with languages like Python that force some element of syntax formatting on you. I shudder to imagine working on a 100,000+ line code base written in Perl. Does anyone remember the day’s of seeing just how much logic you could cram into a single line of Perl? “As someone who took a Perl class in college and really enjoyed it at the time, I have to say, I find other languages a easier to work with.” Okay, this is a tricky thing to talk about, because I don’t want to deny your own experience here, but I think that the fact that so many people say things.like. this is much more of social phenomena that a reflection of technical circumstances. The CS intelligensia decided many years back that it was cool to be a perl-hater, but suppose we were talking about something that they were pushing as the greatest thing ever.

My contention is that you’d be reluctant to stand up and disagree with them, you might even be doubting your own experience– you might be thinking to yourself things like “I don’t see what’s great about this, but gee, maybe I didn’t really learn it all that well. I should take a look at it again someday.” Myself, I really think we could use better ways of making collective decisions than this. I used to be a Perl guy too, but of course, what you hear most is that its hard to read and that’s undeniable. For all the great size of CPAN, it just wasn’t keeping up with where other languages were going. It tried to be all things to all people and that’s just not feasible.

Finally, there were the many years that Parrot was under construction and the growth of Java and the other upstart languages such as Ruby and Python. Perl, which was once king of the web hill, just didn’t stand a chance.

Then, the framework and CMS craze of the mid-2000s lifted Python and Ruby firmly above Perl. There are Perl web frameworks but they are clunky. And, there are virtually no Perl CMSs. I used to be a Perl guy too, but of course, what you hear most is that its hard to read and that’s undeniable.

I’d deny that, myself. It can be written so that it’s harder to read, particularly if you don’t make any effort to think about how it’ll be read later. For all the great size of CPAN, it just wasn’t keeping up with where other languages were going.

I’m really not sure what you mean here CPAN module continue to be maintained and updated. It tried to be all things to all people and that’s just not feasible. True enough, and I’m not telling you you need to be a perl guy or any other kind of guy for that matter. Finally, there were the many years that Parrot was under construction You mean perl6: rakudo actually runs (mainly) on the mohrvm. They gave up on parrot for some reason. Among perl5 people there’s some annoyance that Larry Wall named his next project “perl”: when it got hung up it contributed to the “perl is dead” story (actually, perl6 has very little connection to perl5, and if anything perl5 development improved– a bunch of new blood moved in when the perl6 project started).

and the growth of Java and the other upstart languages such as Ruby and Python. All of which means perl isn’t the hottest language on the planet any more, which is to say that there are other languages that are doing well too.

The weird thing is the perception that no one uses perl, perl is dead, etc. Actually, just as an example, perl5’s unicode support was far more complete than most languages for many years (they might’ve caught up there, though at a guess perl5 would still compete on performance). Perl, which was once king of the web hill, just didn’t stand a chance. Not of remaining the only king of the hill, no. Continuing to be one of the king’s of the hill, yes, arguably: there are a lot of large, established projects (and a few new ones, like duckduckgo) that had no great interest in staying trend compliant.

Then, the framework and CMS craze of the mid-2000s lifted Python and Ruby firmly above Perl. There are Perl web frameworks but they are clunky.

And, there are virtually no Perl CMSs. I don’t claim to be an expert in either field, but from what I’ve seen of the various perl frameworks (Catalyst, Mojolicious, not to mention more obscure ones like Poet) I don’t think they deserve to be called clunky, and I doubt that Bricolage has much to apologize for as a CMS. I think it’s wrong to conclude that this indicates exactly how much people like or dislike a given language for its inherent qualities. People are choosing what to work with or not work with based upon what pays and what has a future, not just what they like working with. Obviously Visual Basic and Cobol are not a good career choice. I think this explains other results like why Bash is so highly regarded, according to that chart, and why, despite people “hating PHP”, they apparently love Laravel. As a data scientist you should know better.

You have to focus on the facts first, like more people tagged Python as a tech they want to work with than Java, and check your assumptions on each inference you make about this. Someone else’s first inference would be that there are simply more Python jobs available nowadays. Or they think those jobs pay better. Or they think they’ll work on more interesting problems, just because companies happen to use Python for those kind of problems. Which reason(s) is it? You don’t know at all.

I notice that, as “hated” as Fortran is, no one has gone back and rewritten all those old numerical libraries in a modern “good” language. Instead every new machine has to have a Fortran compiler so the programs we write in the new, good languages on the new, good machines can go back and link to the (compiled) programs written in old, bad Fortran. (Well, I guess only machines that numerical analysis.) Qualification: some have been. And advances since the 70s have often NOT been written in Fortran. That’s because there is quite a bit of magic in writing numerical software to achieve stability for super-small and super-large numbers and to maximize bits of precision in the results, the order of operations is very important (e.g.

Such as sorting an array from smallest to largest before adding up the elements), and this work is tedious and therefore nobody wants to reimplement these numerical libraries in a new language. Just something as simple as finding the best pivots to solve a matrix might be quite complex. I’m a programmer who’s been messing with R of late, and it doesn’t strike me that there’s anything unusually terrible about it, what it is old and well-established, so there’s multiple entrenched oddities you need to dance around, and multiple layers of competing fixes, and you need to know your way around the ecosystem of available libraries (yes, you’d better keep an eye on Hadley Wickham and cohorts, i.e.

The “tidyverse”). This describes.every. software project that’s over a decade old. There’s something profoundly strange about saying “man, this language sucks except for the superb libraries and the excellent developers”. I don’t know of anything that rivals “ggplot2”, for example.

You would be surprised how many COBOL job openings there are these days, although the language has virtually none of the (built-in) features we value in languages today. The mainframe culture out there has learned to extend the language through various means, however. I do remember working at a place in the late 90’s that was able to divide work across each of the 32 CPUs on their 32-way server. It was a payroll application for a huge installation, so it saved probably 10 hours of precious runtime on each run. It would be interesting to know how liking/disliking a language correlates with experience and competence in that language. Conjecture: early on in our experience with a language, the things we don’t like about it tend to be features that we regard as unfamiliar or counter-intuitive or just difficult to grasp, usually because they are different from the language we came from.

When we’ve been using a language for years, the things we don’t like about it are more likely to be genuine design faults in the language. However, the kind of criticisms that an experienced user would voice would probably not cause them to say in a job application that they aren’t prepared to use the language.

Saying that probably marks you out as someone who has never really mastered the language in question. In my experience it’s a great mistake to be too choosy about the tools you’re prepared to use. In the end what matters is whether the problem you’re tackling is interesting.

I understand Rails is long in the tooth and has deficiencies such as no concurrency but if you have to prototype a web app.quickly., you can hardly do better than Rails. It is still a popular framework in the surveys and has tons of features. If you want to move to Elixir & Phoenix from RoR, I understand but that is a new learning curve. That said, I too was confused about Ruby being trashed like that Ruby inspires loyalty like few languages and it works for many common problems that don’t require concurrency or high performance. You would have a hard time beating Ruby’s expressiveness within an object oriented context.

1) I find it very hard to get a good answer for most of my questions on ASP.net MVC. 2) The Visual studio IDE does not provide good support for UI development 3) Most of the security mechanisms like Identity require long learning curve and often have easier implementation in other languages 4) EDMX solves ORM problems but complicates things when DB schema changes in DB first approach. On multiple occasions, my project has gone bonkers when i used the update EDMX from updated DB option. 5) Error handling needs to be user defined and hard to figure out and most of the errors are directly showin in the View (Browser), with hapazard stack trace, which is difficult to understand. 6) When NuGEt packages are updated, several dlls are added which dont contribute to the code quality, they are mostly addons which dont serve any purpose unless some arcane function gets used in a corner case which is usually not required. For these reasons and so much more, I completely dislike development in ASP.net.

The “rivalries” chart is kind of amusing. But rivalry usually implies a two-way street. That is, if A dislikes B, then B dislikes A approximately the same amount. Does your chart indicate that? For example, you have a linux: Windows rivalry, which says that a large percentage of people who liked linux disliked Windows.

Does it go the other way? Is there a similarly large number of people who liked Windows who also disliked linux? People who liked json disliked xml? Do people who like xml dislike json?