The 2nd one. All the variables getting flattened into a single array
when you pass them to a function.
Sorry for the confusion.
-Rob
> On 20010509.0811, Stephen A. Brenner said ...
>
> I'm trying to figure out what was meant by perl not having variables.
>
> It could be that Perl is not very fussy about variable declarations like some
> other languages.
>
> Or perhaps he's referring to the somewhat crude way that variables are passed
> from subroutines. All the values go into an array list.
>
> Steve
>
> At 11:23 PM 5/8/01 -0700, you wrote:
> >No variables in perl?!?!?!? I use at least 3 kinds of variables on a regular
> >basis:
> >Scalar:
> >$a + $b = $c
> >Array:
> >$a[0] + $a[1] = $a[2]
> >Hash:
> >$a{a} + $a{b} = $a{c}
> >Maybe I don't understand what your're saying? I only use shift/unshift/pop/
> >push/splice on variables that I made arrays, and as far as I know, calling
> >one of these functions on a scalar or hash results in an error.
> >Granted, perl is a bit ugly... A full rebuild from scratch is underway
> >last I heard, but don't hold your breath, it IS a large task.
> >One other thing to note - perl is standard on almost every Unix-like
> >OS. Python is not, at least not yet. I would venture to say that mod_perl
> >is in wider use than mod_python, if you're looking for web usage.
> >Does the concept of "tainted data" exist in python? Haven't looked into
> >it thoroughly yet. Are there any built in security features in python?
> >The interactive interpreter in python is kewl though. It would be nice
> >to have a kind of "perlsh" ... maybe for perl 6 ...
> >
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 06:52:26PM -0700, Rob Hudson wrote:
> >> I would tend not to use Perl for anything too large as it's function
> >> setup is strange. I don't like how there are no variables, as you
> >> mention, everything is passed in some sort of an array, and you have
> >> to 'shift' off what you need.
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >> PS: What's the 'K' in K<bob>?
> >>
> >> > On 20010508.1523, Bob Miller said ...
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 01:57:25PM -0700, Cory Petkovsek wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > I think this has already been mentioned before, but I'm finding the
> >> > > need to learn a scripting language. Something more powerful than
> >> > > bash, but not as indepth(?) as C.
> >> > >
> >> > > I currently know C, C++ and Java. Can anyone tell me in about a
> >> > > paragraph why I should learn perl or python or
> >> > > $your_favorite_scripting_language? I don't need to be sold hard, I
> >> > > just want a few highlights of each language, especially how it is
> >> > > related to bash and C or C++ (not java ;(
> >> >
> >> > I know Perl pretty thoroughly. I have written a few dozen lines of
> >> > Python. If I needed to learn a scripting language today, I would pick
> >> > Python, but I have too much invested in Perl to make the switch.
> >> >
> >> > Perl is very powerful and very ugly. Its power comes from having nearly
> >> > all of libc built in, and from the Comprehensive Perl Archive Network
> >> > (CPAN), a truly huge library. I always start a nontrivial Perl project
> >> > by searching CPAN for keywords. Perl also has strong regular expression
> >> > support fairly well integrated into the language. Not all problems
> >> > need regexps in their solution, but when they do, you can't beat Perl.
> >> >
> >> > Perl is also ugly. Its semantics are just weird because perl 3 and
> >> > perl 4 had no datastructures except lists (one-dimensional vectors)
> >> > and hashes, and it only had dynamic scoping. References (pointers),
> >> > objects, and lexical scoping were added in perl 5, and Perl suffers
> >> > from its legacy. Perl also uses lots of punctuation, and the
> >> > punctuation makes programs hard to read.
> >> >
> >> > Python does not yet have anything equivalent to CPAN, but it's
> >> > a much cleaner design, since it was object oriented and lexically
> >> > scoped from the beginning.
> >> >
> >> > K<bob>
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
