> If the language can't be explained in 50 pages, it's no good. If it's not possible to clearly describe the core of a computer programming language in fifty pages, then it has probably been embellished with features, unnecessary to the language proper, to help it compete in the lame one-size-fits-all strand of programming language debate. In this respect Perl is a cautionary example, having no coherent core that I could tell, just a cobbled-together collection of features intended to try to replace single purpose programs. (But then again, "those days are dead and gone and the eulogy was delivered by Perl.")
Jason Catena
