perl [was: in defense of Java, again]
Mister.Ed at AgoraCart.com
Thu Jan 26 13:00:53 MST 2006
Jonathan Ellis wrote:
>>Other that code written very clearly, perl is one of the easiest
>>languages to write unreadable code in that a future maintainer will have
>>no hope of understanding. It's not the one always implies the other;
>>just that it's more probable. One of my CS professors said it best.
>>Perl is a great language for doing lots of things quickly, and it's very
>>powerful. However in the hands of most people perl is a "write-only"
Where you one of those this professor directed this comment at? Just
wondering, since you seem to be one with issues about the Perl language,
not to mention any other language discussed that doesn't start with
"py". I thought I might see an intelligent or thoughtful response that
might help me see aspects I haven't found/noticed in Perl about the
maintainability others encounter inthe platform (despite using it for 7
years), per chance I might see someone elses view on this subject and
improve upon it. Instead, I saw a professor's opinion algorithm that
was obviously embraced and deformed when you were "coming of age" in
I am just happy to see so many great tools to work with, for the most
part. I do remember the old days, and they were fun despite coding 3
weeks to make a computer go beep. However, I like the capabilities of
the current timeframe and the value I can create with those programmign
tools (and I will hopefully continue to evolve as they likewise do so).
> Often, perl fanboys will respond to this with something like, "but you
> can write unmaintainable code in any language!" That's true. However,
> as Erik Naggum said, "It's not that perl programmers are idiots, it's
> the language rewards idiotic behavior in a way that no other language or
> tool has ever done." (From a semi-famous post on perl:
> http://www.underlevel.net/jordan/erik-perl.txt. Warning: bring a thick
> skin if hearing "perl is broken" brings emotions similar to "your
> daughter is ugly.")
Well my daughter(s) are not ugly, so anyone saying such a comment
regarding my daughters would make me laugh outwardly. Perl is not ugly
either, and since I do not own it emotionally (fer pete's sake, it a
friggin tool), I would need no skin at all ;)
If you notice the date of the post (March 2000), I could then compare
this argument, against any language mind you, to someone dismissing the
current Intel cpu architecture as a broken platform based upon the
capabilities of an outdated 486SX cpu.
Any truly dynamic language will have aspects that will reward idiots. If
it does not, maybe it is not as dynamic as it appears. Python's appears
to be arrogance ;-P
Any weak person can latch onto negativity, but unlike a weak-minded
person, a strong one will look for the positive in in tool or person
they encounter. If the tool does not suit their immediate needs, they
will not use it and then retain it in their arsenal until depreciated,
should a need arise to use it.
> That's why these days you mostly see sysadmins and other not-really-
> experienced developers using Perl.
I think you have Perl confuzzeled with PHP.
It must be pretty lonely where you sit: One tool and all others be
damned ... as well as those that use them.
More information about the PLUG