Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

use Perl

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

[ Create a new account ]

nicholas (3034)

nicholas
nwc10+useperl@colon.colondot.net
http://www.ccl4.org/~nick/

Perl 6 Groupie

Journal of nicholas (3034)

Wednesday November 15, 2006

06:13 PM

Fundamental Truths

[ #31619 ]

I feel that RFC 1925 is under-rated. In particular the axioms given in sections 2.1 and 2.8: It Has To Work. and It is more complicated than you think..

Sadly I see too much of corollary 6a - It is always possible to add another level of indirection.. Please, just K.I.S.S.

List all Journal entries

Fundamental Truths More | Login | Reply

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to use the classic discussion system instead. If you login, you can remember this preference.

Indirection is not abstraction (Score:1)

by Tony Finch (6392)

http://www.zedshaw.com/rants/indirection_is_not_abstraction.html [zedshaw.com]
some win32 perl distros (Score:2)

by jhi (318)

It says "possible". It doesn't use any of the words "useful", "practical", "feasible", "necessary", "beneficial", "desireable", and so forth.
- Re: (Score:2)
  
  by jhi (318)
  
  Oh, bother, I seem to have picked an old subject line, dangers of web browsers remembering too much...
11a (Score:1)

by chrimble (2034)

Surely, it's corollary 11a you see too much of? :-)

Get More Comments

Reply

use Perl

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

Navigation

use Perl Log In

nicholas (3034)

Journal of nicholas (3034)

Fundamental Truths

Fundamental Truths 4 Comments More | Login | Reply /

Please Log In to Continue

Indirection is not abstraction (Score:1)

some win32 perl distros (Score:2)

Re: (Score:2)

11a (Score:1)