At 02:17 PM 8/4/00 -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
>I'm with Chaim on this one. One of the things I *love* about perl is
>that it doesn't constrain me to a particular paradigm and moreover it
>almost naturally supports other paradigms (like functional
>programming). I'm always touting this aspect of Perl and often people
>from other backgrounds (scheme, lisp, Java, etc.) are surprised and
>delighted when perl lowers the barrier to their entry and
>understanding.
>
>That said, if perl starts looking more like lisp than perl, I'll be
>here to yell bloody murder! along with Simon :-)
I think what is likely to happen is that some people's perl will look very
OO, some people's perl will look very functional, and others will look like
"classic perl". I see no problem with that.
Perl has a history of taking the best from all over the place. Taking the
best ideas of functional programming, and the best ideas of OO programming,
and allowing you to use what works for you is good.
I'd like a language where I can write object-oriented quick-and-dirty
scripts with a functional flair.
>-Scott
>--
>Jonathan Scott Duff
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
