* 2010-02-17 12:45 (+0100), Bram Moolenaar wrote:

> One of the most important aspects of a programming or scripting
> language is that it's easy to read back. Only then can one figure out
> what it's doing exactly and easily spot mistakes. Both Perl and Lisp
> fail miserably on this aspect.

Are there some reliable sources which indicate that Perl and Lisp code
are not usually read, debugged or fixed after the code has been
initially written? Or is there a general consensus or verifiable data
that fixing problems in Perl or Lisp code takes more time than fixing
problems in code written in other languages? "Failing miserably", as you
put it, sounds like there is a clear and somewhat objectively measurable
difference.

I have no answers to those but I sense a danger in discussions like
this. It can easily go to "my favourite language is a very clear one"
and "other people's code and favourite languages are unreadable."

My opinion is that a familiar coding style and familiar language make
code readable. And then also the programming style of not doing too much
different things in a tiny part of code. Perl "fails miserably" with me
because I still haven't had time to actually learn it. But I think it's
me who fails.

I'm relatively new to Lisp but I find it beautiful and clear. It's often
verbose and macros hide boring repetitive code and complexity. Then
again, I have had motivation to learn and understand Lisp. Motivation
helps a lot. :-)

> Unfortunately, programmers are proud of creating something that other
> people have a hard time figuring out what it does.

I can't comment about the pride but I'd like to ask what do you think
affects more, coding style or language? I'm asking because in the
previous paragraph you spoke about languages' readability and now you
switched to programmers. Maybe you mean that some programmers try to do
clever and powerful tricks which do a lot of things with a tiny piece of
code but are difficult to understand quickly (?).

-- 
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

Reply via email to