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.
| [reply] |
It's not really a very good article on Perl i.m.h.o. It talks about where to put the curly (who cares?) and is rather shallow all in all.
I'd be surprised if it convinced anyone to use Perl for what they wanted to do in Java/C/Whatever | [reply] |
- "maintainence nightmares"???
- Complete misunderstanding of use diagnostics;
- "(..) is the list operator, and envokes list context on its contents." -- wrong wrong wrong!
- horrid grammar, worse spelling
| [reply]
[d/l] |
The node title reminded me of the time I did 2 16hr code-athons on a project two days in a row. That second night I had a *dream* in Perl. Very, very strange. I can't explain it now, but it seemed to make sense at the time.
cLive ;-)
| [reply] |
While this probably comes as no surprise to the Monks here
Or the Fortune 500 companies who rely on Perl for everything. Perl is already taken seriously and has been for years. This is mindless propaganda dribble. | [reply] |
It's not clear to me who you're accusing of "mindless propaganda dribble", me or the author of the article, so let me try to get a few points straight.
First off, I posted this news item and tried to convey the gist of the article. It is written from the assumption that Perl is not taken seriously for sophisticated application development. The author embarks on the mission to prove that presumption false. As has been remarked by others, the way he goes about this is questionable, but his intentions are laudable.
There's no doubt that Perl does enjoy an excellent reputation in a number of companies, but unfortunately there's just as little doubt that it hasn't in many others. Indeed, I'm afraid that it is considered a useful language for the purposes listed, but not for full-blown application development.
On Perl Monks, a question that comes up time and again is how to convince the pointy haired boss that Perl is a viable programming language for project X. Unfortunately I'm sure I need not convince most of you that the buzz-word coefficiennt of a project is often more important than technical arguments.
In view of all this, I don't see any mindless dribble, nor on my part, nor on that of the author. Of course, I'm open for any argument one may have to offer.
Lastly, a dictionary search on irony could be useful.
Just my two cents, -gjb-
| [reply] |
