[ILUG-Social] Perl is a pool language
Niall O Broin
niall at magicgoeshere.com
Thu Oct 12 23:12:40 IST 2000
On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 01:57:31PM +0100, Joe Desbonnet wrote:
> I believe you. And perhaps Perl5 in a good development environment is
> maintainable. But in my experience, unless there is very tight control over
> coding practices, the whole thing quickly degenerates into an unholy mess.
I'm a Perl fan, but this can be all too true. I've just had to revisit a 300
line (using a few hundred lines more in a library, but they haven't changed)
program and my head hurts. In fairness to Perl, the fault is mine. But if I'd
written the same program in C it would have been much bigger, source wise,
and if I'd written it as badly, I'd never have understood it again. I've a
gut feeling that I couldn't have written it as messily in Lisp, but as it's
been a while since Lisp paid for my groceries, I couldn't have written it in
Lisp at all :-)
> Of course that will happen with any language/tools if the development
> process is broken, but I think it happens a whole lot faster with Perl.
Everything happens a whole lot faster with Perl :-)
> I think the language suffered from adhoc growth over about a decade. And it
> seems that OO was an after thought.
Now what popular descendant of BCPL does that remind me of ?
> TCL and Python are much cleaner scripting languages IMHO,
Whatever about Python (because I don't know it at all - I can't bring myself
to look at a language where white space is significant) I feel TCL is a much
less expressive language than Perl (though I have to admit to not knowing it
as well as I know Perl) - ideally suited for its design purpose as an
embedded tool language, perhaps.
> and much of what you get at CPAN is available for those languages too.
Much, but nowhere near all.
> Anyway -- I prefer to compile my code which rules out all of the above.
Doesn't rule out Perl :-)
P.S. Have any of you read Damian Conway's OO Perl book ?
More information about the Social