Programming Perl
Pringing History January 1991 First Edition. August 1991 Minor Corrections. March 1992 Minor Corrections. September 1996 Second Edition. July 2000 Third Edition.
Stats for nerds
90recommend
298mentions
214people
2007–2026years
42% recommend54% neutral4% critical
Mentions per year
What Hacker News says
- Programming Perl, 1st Ed. from Larry Wall. The three great virtues of a programmer were enlightening for a fresh-outta-college beginner.
- It's not just AI.
I grew up with borrowed ZX Spectrum manuals that detailed the Z80 assembly language, (a clone of) a Red Book that came with the (clone of a) Apple II computer that had assembly listings, and fold-out circuit-board diagrams for the whole computer. I taught myself C++ from the manual that came with Borland Turbo C++ and the Waite Group C book. I laughed out loud at footnotes in the Camel book, which I read from the start through to where it becomes a reference. I read Sedgewick's Algorithms cover to cover for fun when I found it in a local library as a teenager. I borrowed the ancient "build a flight simulator" book from a friend in high school.
I've bought books by Kleppmann, Julia Evans, and Hillel Wayne's in-progress book on proofs. I owned the gang of four design patterns book (although I won't pretend -- like everyone else -- to have done more than skim a few patterns!)
And yet.
For many, many years now every time I've wondered into a bookstore, and meandered over to the fondly-remembered computer books section with a sense of nostalgia, I've just been deeply disappointed and sad. If you're lucky, you'll find one or two books that look worth reading, and the rest is just the product of some giant publishing machine whose sole purpose seems to be to fleece unsuspecting neophytes of their money by pushing on them hastily written books on whatever the current fad is. Often when you look at the publication date and compare it to the release date of the software, it's obvious you couldn't write a _good_ book that fast.
And they're all huge. The C Programming Language, Javascript: the good parts, and The Go Programming Language are just about the only three examples I know of where concision was considered a virtue. Most are just fluffy as hell, which is offensive to the kind of mind that wants to learn a programming language.
Add to that the observation in the article that paper books for programming languages are inherently weird.
So yeah, nobody cracks open a programming book anymore, but there are lots of compelling reasons beside AI, reasons that make you grateful if AI can save you from having to wade through an ocean of dreck.
I can imagine a heavily curated shelf of programming books, and it would be a thing of beauty, a collection of potent fireworks shot into the dark of the unknown. But, like, who would go to Barnes and Noble or whatever and actually see it, and actually buy something?
- 30 years ago (well, 28 years ago) we had the Perl Cookbook which was basically Stack Overflow but printed and without annoying moderators closing your questions. That and the camel book never even made it back to my bookshelf because they just always sat open on my desk.
- Thats actually right. Tbh, I loved learning languages and read books like Programming Perl just because somebody recommended it in an online forum (back in the day). So I get the appeal. But in the end, coding by hand is on its way out and its better to move on rather than romanticize.
- Agreed!
I learned Perl after trying C; and after struggling with `scanf` (not even getting to tokenization), the ease and speed of `while (<>) { @A = split;` for text-handling made it easy to fall in love. This (in the mid 90s, before Java, JavaScript, and C++ TR1) was also my first contact with associative arrays.
I was also drawn to the style of the Camel Book.
More than most other languages, Perl encouraged one-liners. When I later read PG's "Succinctness is power" essay, I thought of Perl.
- While I'm not a fan of Perl per se, I find it fascinating. One of the reasons for that is that its creator, Larry Wall, is a linguist by trade. This shows in a lot of ways, for example by the fact that, like natural languages, Perl has context: A variable can behave differently whether it is used in a scalar context or an array context. At the same time stuff like this is responsible for Perl's reputation as a write-only language, a cliche which has at least some merit to it.
I can highly recommend reading at least the first chapter of Programming Perl, it's highly insightful even if you don't plan to write or read any Perl.
