* Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [21 Sep 2000 07:22]:
> Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Yep, this is bad IMHO. Your concern is valid I think, but your
> > "solution" isn't a good one. Why not just use a module like
> > Damian's Quantum::Superpositions?
> No offense to Damian, but I tried to read and understand his
> documentation and I thought I was back in grad school. I don't think
> it's the fault of the writing either; I think that
> Quantum::Superpositions is trying to do something that's rather too
> complicated to explain clearly to the average programmer.
> It's a neat idea, but I don't expect to see it ever widely used.
I had a thorough read of it yesterday morning, after having been using
it at a basic level for a few weeks. I was quite impressed by it. I'm
really quite impressed by it. Mostly, I've been using it for validation
of data (usually where the data already exists in an array and building
a regexp from the array would be too annoying). In fact, I had to
translate some code that used it into code that didn't use it, and it
went from 3 lines to being about 15. In other words, it simplifies some
operations, thus reducing the likelihood of errors.
I'm not great at either maths or physics (in fact, most people will
happily tell you that I suck at both, including myself), but I can see
what the module does. The main trick is getting the average programmer
to actually read the documentation. Hence, it's mostly a case of putting
more 'practical' examples of its use in the manual.
Of course, I would be interested in seeing a version of Q::S that worked
with threads and/or multiprocesses.
I'll be interested to see Damian's paper when it comes out.
cheers,
--
iain truskett, aka Koschei. <http://eh.org/~koschei/>
You know you are addicted to coffee if...
24 You get a speeding ticket even when you're parked.
