David Green wrote:
It occurs to me that "log" is a pretty short name for a function I rarely use. (In fact, I'm not sure I've ever used it in perl.) On the other hand, I -- and a thousand or so CPAN modules -- are always logging stuff in that other popular computer sense. (All right, that number isn't exactly the result of a rigourous study... I did find 57 modules that mentioned logarithms.)


The inertia of tradition weighs heavily here, but perhaps we could call it ln(). (If anyone asks, I'm prepared to say with a straight face that it stands for "log (numeric)".) And/or log(), but with the :base arg mandatory -- then as long as your status logging doesn't have a :base, you can have both.

Umm. At the risk of pointing out the obvious, P6 has redefined the syntax of regular expressions, converted bitwise negation into a stringification unary and a binary catenation operator, and torqued a bunch of other keywords and line noise^W^Woperator characters out of shape.

Do we really give a rat's posterior about the historical legacy of a mathematical function that (statistically) never gets called?

Like everything else mathematical, jam it into a Math:: class and clean up the default namespace. (FWIW: My perl scripts don't do logs, in EITHER sense of the word. I don't want to replace one bit of namespace clutter with another one. All you web guys can use the Apache::log method, or whatever.)

=Austin

Reply via email to