Snip snip. ;-) I find long quoted passages difficult to parse. Call it what you like.
> There are many pragmatic cases where 'throw away' or 'limited > maintainability' code is perfectly acceptable too. In those cases, I > have been known to write hacky perl to do this. I highly doubt an > alternative in lisp is much easier to implement, even with the proper > infrastructure. As for maintainability, I've got perl/php scripts that > are just a few pages long which are quite maintainable. > I'm not saying you can't do it better these days, but if you do, you are > probably using some ideas which were formulated originally in perl... > thus, it's been a useful language, and not some pariah of programmer > corruption. > One can make the claim that I'm stupid for this, but that'll be > difficult to prove definitively... :-) > Re: the "throw-away" code - agreed. I have volumes of "throw-away" code (written mostly in shell and perl). Once again, the issue is not the slam-bam-thank-you-ma'am junk. I must have emphasized lisp somewhere (though I don't see it), but weight should equally be tendered to python, ruby, c/c++/c# and the like (read: anything *but* perl). If by "formulated originally in perl" you are referring to PCRE: sed/awk were doing that long before. The acronym is a misnomer. Surely you recognize *that*. ;-) Finally, no claims of stupidity, just those of open disagreement and discussion. -- If UNIX doesn't have the solution you have the wrong problem. UNIX is simple, but it takes a genius to understand it's simplicity. _______________________________________________ RLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
