> > Yeah, it's turing-complete. So what? > > 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.
(Sorry, couldn't just stick to the pointer) I don't get this argument - how is Perl any different than any other language in being easy to write bad code. It's pretty easy to write bad code in pure Java, just as well as C++, PHP, Python, and Ruby. It's the tools, libraries, and frameworks that you use with each of the languages that keep a developer in line. To me that has nothing to do with TIMTOWTDI. The great thing about Perl is you can use these methodologies to force you to write good code, but you can write good code in multiple ways. Now I'll refer back to my pointer to the archives as to the opinionated argument on whether that is a good thing or not for a company or user. The concept of "good code" is in the eye of the beholder. Jesse .-----------------------------------. | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. | | Don't Fear the Penguin. | | IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net | `-----------------------------------'
