On Tue, 24 May 2011 11:52:39 -0500 John Bokma <j...@castleamber.com> wrote: > >> > $d = @a; > >> > >> That will give you the number of elements in @a. What you (probably) > >> mean is %hash = @array; > > > > If I was even considering using Perl, this one exchange would send me > > screaming in the opposite direction. > > To me as silly as all those people who give Python a wide berth because > of significant whitespace. I am glad that I am not so limited in that > respect. To me programming languages are like writing systems used by > humans; each has its short comings and each has its beauty.
My point was that even proponents of the language can make a significant error based on the way the variable is named. It's like the old Fortran IV that I first learned where the name of the variable determined whether it was an integer or a floating point. One of my favorite quotes (not sure if it was about Perl or APL) is "I refuse to use a programming language where the proponents of it stick snippets under each other's nose and say 'I bet you can't guess what this does.'" When I first looked at Perl it looked like line noise. When I first looked at Python it looked like pseudo-code. Look, I couldn't care less what other people use. I just don't see any reason for someone to come into a Python group and start proselytizing about why their tool is better than ours any more than I would feel any need to go to a Perl group and start trying to convert them. Bottom line - they did a study once (sorry, can't point to it any more) to determine the best tool for development. Turns out that the most productive tool was generally the one that the user believed was the most productive. In hindsight I think that that was rather obvious. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain <da...@druid.net> | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
