comment on

This article is poorly written. It puts forth an argument ("Perl should be taken seriously"), then provides nothing to back it up. In fact, after the first section, it's a beginner's primer on Perl syntax.

Additionally, some of the best reasons to use Perl (closures, eval, references-as-scalars, lists + map/grep, etc) aren't even listed. The best benefit (CPAN) isn't even mentioned. Should we write our "clarification"?

------
We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.

Please remember that I'm crufty and crochety. All opinions are purely mine and all code is untested, unless otherwise specified.

In reply to Re: Thinking in Perl by dragonchild
in thread Thinking in Perl by gjb

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


No such thing as a small change
	PerlMonks