[KULUA] Perl Puzzles -- a challenge for Perl mongers

[Mike Coleman]

"Stephen D. Spencer" <kulua at boneyard.lawrence.ks.us> writes:
> On 4 Jun 2001, Mike Coleman wrote:
> > My intent is not to bash, but rather to criticize (in the formal sense).
> 
> if( $bashing != syntactic_sugar(criticism) ) {
> 	im_a_monkeys_uncle();
> }
> 
>  :)

Well, if my criticism is just a sweet form of bashing, I'm doing it wrong.  By
criticism, I mean evaluation of something via rational argument, and
suggestions for how problems can be ameliorated.

If, for example, I'm making personal attacks, or just bitching without
suggesting fixes, that's bashing, in my book.  I do think there's a
difference.

> Heheheh.  Read my last message.  Prototyped any C projects in python lately?
> Some folks actually find it to be a "best" tool for crawling into the guts
> of C, actually.  Has something to do with how when perl programmers wrap
> C libraries for use in perl modules, they tend to look strikingly like C
> without the manual memory allocation stuff.  Now, if you are only speaking
> of web programming and/or systems scripts, please indicate such.  

Yes I have (see subterfugue.org), but I'm not following the rest of this.

> > Python also has modern programming features like OO and exceptions designed
> > in, not bolted on as with Perl.
> 
> When nine hundred years old are you, look you so good you will not!

Yes, but you can be *rid* of *Perl*.  ;-)

> > Beyond that, the languages are basically
> > equivalent in power.  
> 
> Hrm.  Well, the python tome I have actually says something about python being
> a bit slower...

Yes, that's generally thought to be true, though I don't think anyone's done a
serious comparison.  If a 5% speed penalty is a problem, you're probably
outside the domain of Perl/Python anyway.

> > My objections stem from two problems.  First, I think we do a disservice to
> > new programmers if we don't point them in the right direction.  If someone
> > says to me "I want to learn a scripting language--which should I learn
> > first?", my answer would be "Python or Lisp, the former being more practical
> > and the latter more powerful".
> 
> Did you grow up in a fundamentalist Xian household?  This sounds
> frighteningly like the reasoning the Xians use to cram their dogma down 
> other folks' throats.  I sure hope some dump fanatical bastard doesn't decide
> to show up at the perl conference with a jacket lined with C4...

*cough*ad hominem*cough*  Nope, sorry.  Are you saying I *shouldn't* answer
 that way?

> I see only tenuous strands of logic connecting that particular situation to
> that of the co-existence of perl and python.

The connection is that if *you* pay very careful attention, you might be able
to see the future coming, too!

> Because RedHat r00LZ and FreeBSD sucks!  I think the real question here is: 
> What would Linus do?

He uses vi, what does he know?  :-)

> Actually, it seems that you have been in the "industry" for quite some time.
> The stock response will I give unto you.   You have the following options: 

Very practical advice.

> > Like FORTRAN, COBOL, BASIC and Algol before, Perl has been a dramatic
> > contribution to our discipline.  Nothing can change that.  Now, though, I
> > think it's been superseded and, as far as I can see, will become a niche
> > language long-term.
>
> The same has been said about Java.  The same was said about C++ and Pascal.
> The same has been said about csh and bash.

Tom Christiansen said it about csh, and he may have almost single-handedly
made it happen.  (google: csh considered harmful, and hit "I feel lucky")

> If you wish to see python become more prevalent in the "industry", do so
> through action rather than trying to do so through pendantry.

I've been trying to kick my pendantry habit, but it just keeps hanging
around.  :-)

--Mike

-- 
Mike Coleman, mkc at mathdogs.com
  http://www.mathdogs.com -- problem solving, expert software development