Robin Bowes Wrote: > CardinalFang said the following on 23/12/2005 09:25: > >>>Java does allow you to wrap features up into nice, > >>>self contained functional blocks that can be black box tested and > >> > >>then > >> > >>>left well alone. That's my main gripe with Perl, it isn't a > language > >>>that enables that kind of unit construction of an app. > >> > >>Agian, not so. > >> > > > > Sorry, but Perl subroutines to me is a hack. > > Ah, to *you*, maybe. >
Oh come on - no type checking, having to manage parameter lists yourself? Compare it to any other high level language like Java or C++, the code wouldn't even compile with errors in it that Perl would happily try to execute. And don't get me onto the half-hearted object orientation where you have to manage all the members yourself. The fact that it carries on executing in spite of minor errors makes it hard to track problems and along with no type or parameter checking wrecks any chance of black box testing. Perl does not encourage well written easy-to-maintain code. The fact that there's an annual contest to write the most delibrately obfuscated code tells me a lot. People contributing to SlimServer must struggle to work out each other's code and it's almost impossible to write robust, defensive code when the syntax is so Byzantine and hard to fathom. How often have you looked at Perl code, including the standard shipping components, and wondered what was going on in the code? I've looked at it and given up in most cases and I write code for a living. Life's too short. I meant what I said when I called it software Buckaroo. Perl is good at handling text and files, which makes it entirely suitable for web apps and build systems. Use tools appropriately, it's not a matter of preference, just common sense. > > > > Getting parameters using > > shift is horrible, it's like accessing a stack directly. Modules > aren't > > really encapsulation in my mind, they're a packaging feature. Java > class > > packages have much stricter checking on their usage when compiling > > apps. > > > > Perl is good because it is easy to get going with it, but it also > > allows you to be very undisciplined and lazy about coding style and > > legibility. Having to turn on "strict" to catch fundemental coding > > errors doesn't inspire confidence in me, I'm afraid. > > Again, that's personal. Just because *you* don't like it doesn't mean > it's a bad thing. > > > Looks like I disagree with most people on this forum again :-) > > It would appear so. > > R. Ok, here's a prediction then. If SlimServer continues to be written in Perl by a community without strict coding standards and proper unit testing and peer code review, then I predict that customer disatisfaction will increase and Apple will stomp all over the SlimDevices market with iTunes and iBox or whatever they call it. I'd hate to see that happen, but I see them coming along with increasing complaints about the SlimServer software as more and more gets added to it. -- CardinalFang ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CardinalFang's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=962 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=18991 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
