Nick, make a decision. As for myself, I won't sit back and watch this.
yaphet jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> despite all "cyber" appearances to the contrary, i'm one of you - but
who?
I've been looking back through my archives trying to figure out who you
are. You are certainly not someone I recognize, and from the crap that's
coming from you I'm sure I'd recognize your smell pretty quickly. Other
than a basic personality disorder, what precisely is your issue?
> i thought that we assume our users are *lazy* - perl creates
meaningless
> compiler spoon-feeding work for the programmer that smarter languages
> avoid. some languages - most notably java and the 'c' family create
even
> more useless work (what's your guess, 2x-10x when compared to perl?!).
This has been asked so many times that few of us care anymore. We simply
recognize the benefits of a language that expresses thoughts as a whole
than as microscopic pieces of a whole.
> add on the irredeemably ugly and cryptic syntax (you need to be
smart...)
Python isn't ugly? Heck, it isn't even complete. Its blocks just dangle
out there and end wherever you forget to tell it you're ending.
Ugly is a matter of perspective.
> so i agree 100%. perl programmers are often the most intrinsically
bright
> stars shining in the programming universe - if not, they couldn't use
> perl!
>
> the world desperately needs *more* programmers, if for no other reason
> to rewrite, replace, or maintain the perl code that's polluting
> cyberspace!
Precisely what type of programmer? The programmer who's had a semester of
VB and think's he's a systems architect? The programmer who comes into
this or that group insisting that we do his work for him, he just needs a
quick answer and he doesn't want to read the book... that kind? Or are we
talking about the fanatical Python programmer who thinks that the absence
of curly braces makes for maintainable code?
I'm trying desperately to figure out who you represent. Whoever it is, it
isn't the voice of the Perl community.
> perl is *not* the answer. it was for a time, but no more: it's the
wrong
> way.
There is no one way. There is no "one vendor solution", despite MicroSoft
FUD. There is no universal correct language or method for doing anything.
Any given task is more or less suited to this or that language, and this
is even extremely subjective. Within a language, there is usually more
than one way to perform a task... otherwise we're robots, easily
automated, and dispensable.
> >That's not to say it's offensively smart, either. :)
>
> but it is offensive...and it's damaging the progressive improvement in
the
> application of computer programming (scripting, if you will...) to
> business.
I applied Perl and Linux to our VB/Win32-based business and cut 75% off of
our IT budget. What moronic logic are you using?
> sometimes organisms evolve into supremacy over their ecological niche,
> just to find that their niche evolves into irrelevance or is replaced
> entirely.
Hopefully the fate of the Perl 5 Porters culture.
Again, this is a target of the Perl 6 reforms.
I would point out to you that, over the past few months, I've noticed this
snobbery gaining more and more ground within the Python community. Some
months ago I commended them in comp.lang.python on their attitude.
Recently, however, I should be retracting this and seeking absolution for
the lack of insight. They're now worse than I've seen an any Perl forum
outside of the P5P.
p
