That is a rather ignorant statement and only makes sense in a Mainframe echo chamber. PCREs can be found at nearly every level of the modern internet.
I'm sure some Perl programmer can even come up with a 1-liner, capable of operating a nuclear reactor. Barring the esoteric wizardry of those Neckbeards, mere Mortals write Regexes every day. Indeed, some great conventions have emerged around their usage. See the 'x' modifier: https://github.com/bbatsov/ruby-style-guide#regular-expressions - Scott On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 7:29 AM, Tony Thigpen <[email protected]> wrote: > Not at all. > There are mainframe ports of good things. > > You just will not find mainframe ports of bad things. (Yes, I consider > PCRE a "bad" thing.) > > Let's be honest. PCRE is a very strange item. It's *VERY* complex and so > very few programmers are really competent with it. Many programmers pull > examples off the web and play with them until the code works, never > understanding why or how. When you ask them to explain it, they can't. > And that generates non-maintainable code segments.If there is even a > minor problem with the PCRE coding, it takes an expert to figure it out. > > As I mentioned in my previous email, PCRE code just does not rise to the > level of maintainability needed on a mainframe. It's great for a single > programmer shop but does not scale well to a multi-programmer shop. > (Which means most mainframe shops.) > > Of course, this is just my opinion. And why I would not allow PCRE code > in any shop I ever manage. > > > Tony Thigpen > > -----Original Message ----- > From: [email protected] > Sent: 03/24/2014 07:46 AM > >> Which means that libraries that do some functionality cannot be ported >> because 'they were not invented here'. If this is correct, no wonder that >> the classic mainframe is dying. I was trying to believe that this was not >> the case. >> ZA >> >> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android >> >> >> >> >>
