On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 01:29:32AM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
>
> > As a tangent...one of the things that has bothered me about "but" and
> > "is" for properties since the beginning is that they make for
> > excessively long code. Does this bother anyone else?
> >
> > --Dks
>
> Properties have bothered me, but for a different reason. It appears that
> everyone's answer to everything is "make it a property!"
> Properties are just strange to comprehend...they are like hidden attributes
> that are squirreled away until you least expect them...then
I would say that properties are very powerful and, like most powerful
things, could easily be abused.
Oddly enough, it always seemed to me like the whole concept of
properties grew out of wanting a clean way to handle the case where
you want to return a "0 but true" value ("0E0" is and always was squinky).
(along with grammar rewrites...in
> which you can make your one character program make your morning toast for
> you if you decide to rewrite the grammar).
Ah, but think of all the lovely entries the Obfuscated Perl Contest
judges will be soon be receiving! ;>
> So, yes properties bother me, no not because they are wordy (wordiness is
> not bad...clarity good...linenoise bad).
I don't generally mind wordiness...it just seems like properties can
go a little overboad, particularly when there are more than two or
three of them. Just my 0.02, though.
--Dks
