On Sat, 14 May 2005 22:43:24 -0400 Jason Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On May 14, 2005, at 10:19 PM, Adam wrote: > > > Because every language has PCRE, its not really a selling point for > > perl. Python, ruby and pike are all just as good at "mangling > > text". And perl's OO support is awkward and ugly, although you > > could make the argument that the rest of perl is too. > > To each his own. I appreciate the flexibility that Perl enables me. > Some folks like having programming structure shoved down their > throat. Maybe you fit into this mold. Maybe you like to make rediculous assumptions for no reason. I don't recall saying perl's flexibility was bad, or is this a canned response you use anytime anyone critisizes perl, without bothering to read what they said? Perl's ugliness lies in things like requiring you to explicitly declare variables as local scope and having subs to take a single array instead of letting you declare args, and then using an ugly hack to try to work around the problem instead of just fixing it. Or is that stuff adding lots of flexibility that I am unaware of? Seems ruby manages to be just as flexible as perl without having stupid stuff like this, doesn't it? > > No, it explains why PHP does suck. Pointing out the flaws in PHP > > doesn't make perl good. > > Last I checked, that link listed a number of positive features found > in Perl (not just PHP shortcomings). Maybe you should check it again then. It lists 6 problems with PHP, and simply states the obvious fact that perl (like pretty much every language besides PHP) doesn't have these problems. Or do you think "PHP has no lexical scope" is a positive feature of perl? > Sounds to me like you're a > "glass is half full" person. Sounds to me like you're still making rediculous assumptions based on what you want to read, rather than what I wrote. > If you're so excited about Python, Ruby > and Pike, perhaps you'd like to document why they make better > *scripting* languages. I believe that's what this thread is really > about. Except that I am not so excited about them. If you bothered to read, you would notice I said they are "just as good" as perl. You're the one that feels the need to defend perl from vicious attacks like "everyone has PCRE". I simply pointed out that perl is not special, and he could use other, easier to learn languages that are just as good as perl. Adam
