On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:36:54 -0600, "Hans Fugal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 at 09:33 -0700, Jonathan Ellis wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:28:55 -0600, "Hans Fugal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > I wouldn't go so far, in any case, as to say that TMTOWTDI has been > > > conclusively proven to be a Bad Thing. > > > > Yeah, but you're a sysadmin. :) > > Who happens to have a BS in CS and is headed for grad school in CS.
So you're a sysadmin, and an academic. :P > > The only difference between good code and bad code is exactly "what it > > looks like inside." Perl5 makes it easy to write bad code and from what > > I've seen of perl6 that won't change. > > Yeah, but you're a programmer. ;-) The real world mostly cares about > what your program DOES. If perl programmers prduce a good volume of > working quality programs, perl can't be all bad. Not conclusively proven > bad, anyway. Let me guess: you've never had to maintain a few thousand lines of someone else's Perl. -Jonathan .-----------------------------------. | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. | | Don't Fear the Penguin. | | IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net | `-----------------------------------'
