Re^2: What if Perl had an OO standard library?

[awncorp]

I'm very tempted to agree with you "wholesale" given that I've been doing Perl since the mid-late 90s and through many many many bouts of trial and error have learned how to write well-reasoned succinct very Perlish code. However, I recognize that I'm only able to do so because of the amount of time I put into learning the language, and all of my failures along the way.

People (other than us) needing to use Perl, who may not have the time or interest in learning "the ways of the force", who may be coming from other (typically OO) languages, would be much more comfortable in Perl if they could find corollaries to the idioms they already know.

Some examples:

In JavaScript:

['a', 'b', 'c'].forEach(item => console.log(item.toUpperCase()));

In Ruby:

['a', 'b', 'c'].each(|item| puts item.upcase);

In Perl:

print uc("$_"), "\n" for ('a', 'b', 'c');

In Venus:

Venus::Array->new(['a', 'b', 'c'])->call('map', 'say', 'uppercase');

In Venus:

Venus::Array->new(['a', 'b', 'c'])->map(sub{ print uc $_, "\n" })

[hippo]

Your examples here just reinforce my general opinion that full-OO languages where everything is an object are just overly verbose when it comes to simple operations. By eschewing this and having intrinsic non-object types we (in Perl and in other languages which do the same) can write much cleaner and therefore maintainable code.

The contrast is slightly hidden by an overly verbose Perl entry. I think in most cases I would be using

say uc for 'a', 'b', 'c';

or perhaps with qw/a b c/ instead.