> process is a *>HUGE<* mistake.
If this is a valid argument, then why not just use comments insetad of
POD? XML does require some more work, granted. But it pays off.
--
Frank Tobin http://www.uiuc.edu/~ftobin/
Garrett Goebel, at 18:47 -0500 on Thu, 19 Oct 2000, wrote:
> The only acceptable code name other than "Perl6" is "YACN" ;)
Given all this chatter, YAP might be better. You get 1 guess for what "P"
stands for. (No it's not Python).
--
Frank Tobin http://www.uiuc.edu/~ftobin/
ure, "pure" might be a good name. But in
a non-functional context, the name has little meaning with regards to the
concept of "nosideeffects".
--
Frank Tobin http://www.uiuc.edu/~ftobin/
annot in standard Perl programming. This is not to say
one can't do functional programming in Perl, or anything of the like.
However, considering context in which most Perl is written, "pure" has no
meaning, and hence I wouldn't consider it "correct".
--
Frank Tobin http://www.uiuc.edu/~ftobin/
