From: "Ben Tilly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 14:18:57 -0700
On 9/11/07, Palit, Nilanjan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> > It is very bad form to use map as a looping construct.
>
> Can you elaborate why it is a bad form: readability, performance, ...?
> Just want to understand the underlying reason. (To me, both the for &
> map inline forms appear to be the same readability & performance wise.)
Readability is the big difference . . .
. . . Furthermore you're demanding
more from your readers than you need to. Anyone who speaks English
(or who knows a couple of computer languages) can guess what a for
loop does. But only people who know Perl will understand what map
does.
Am I reading this right? Are you actually defending the lowest common
denominator of language design? The paragraph above seems tantamount to
saying,
Perl has some nice functional programming features, but don't
use them, because you might confuse people who only know
stupider languages.
I agree with most of your points, and think they are sufficient to carry
the argument. This point does not help your case, and would be
counterproductive in situations where "map" would be the better choice.
-- Bob Rogers
http://rgrjr.dyndns.org/
_______________________________________________
Boston-pm mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
