On 9/11/07, Jenda Krynicky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: snip > OH MY ! > > Yet another reason to stay away from Perl6. > > After reading that part of S09 I can't keep from thinking that Perl6 > was designed specifically for golf and obfu. Well *. snip
Heh. Perl 6 is going to meet a lot of resistance, but I think in the end the advantages will outweigh the (re)learning curve. For instance my @array =1,2,3,4,5; say @array[3 .. *]; #prints "45\n" instead of my @array =1,2,3,4,5; print @array[3 .. $#array], "\n"; #prints "45\n" Can you really say that the Perl 5 version is better or more Perlish? Is the concept of "whatever" any more confusing that a shadow variable? Or is it just that you are used to how Perl 5 said things? As for being designed for golf, I think there may some merit to that argument, but not in the way you are thinking. The goal is to remove redundant and boiler plate code. This has been a Perl value since the beginning (which is why it is so easy to golf in Perl 5) so we can hardly be surprised that Larry and the others are striving to add even more DWIMery to the language. If we wanted highly verbose languages we could stick with C, C++, Java, etc. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://learn.perl.org/
