David Whipp wrote:
> > A language that doesn't have everything is actually easier to program
> > in than some that do.
>
> The obvious reply is: "There's more than one way to do it"
To which the obvious reply is:
'Although the Perl Slogan is "There's More Than One Way
to Do It", I hesitate to make 10 ways to do something.'
- Larry Wall
IOW, simply to have AWTDI is one of the worst reasons to add a
feature. If it doesn't make the language *better*, LEAVE IT OUT.
> I'm sure you don't want to write "$a = new Integer '32'".
Of course. That would be unbearably absurd.
But how often do you have to write expressions that
operate on three or more URLs? Or even two?
How many perl instrinsics return URLs? How many
perl intrinsics operate on URLs in any way?
So are we to the point of making LWP a built-in?
I hope not.
> A related question is why we want to tie objects. Afterall,
> you can use methods on an object without ever tying it!
HTF does tying have anything to do with the current thread?
--
John Porter
Like music? Then you're gonna love this.
I was into these dudes before anybody.
Asked me to be the manager.
