NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
ugh (Score:1)
I really hate the "I do not understand the language, and therefore I hate it" school of blogging.
rjbs
Huh? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I thought the title stated my position clearly: if you have to use
eval, it’s a sign of something missing from the language (and if you don’t have to but do, it’s a sign of weakness as a programmer).That doesn’t mean a language is bad if it has
eval. If it helps you understand, just substitutegotoforeval; both forms of the statement are completely congruent.urine my do's (Score:1)
Thanks for playing (Score:1)
Better luck next time.
Re: (Score:1)
That's a horrible pun. I like it.
Reply (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
How am I supposed to argue with your example? You showed a design wherein a class reads a config file every time it is instantiated. I have no idea how that can be construed as useful; the fact that you use
evalis incidental and at best draws attention away from the fact that you are reading a config file on every instantiation. After all, “the config file is code!” Do you really need to recompile the code every time someone makes an instance of it? Sorry, that example just doesn’t cut iRe: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Basically my opinion is that anyone who thinks Perl, Python and Ruby differ in any sort of significant fashion hasn’t seen a lot of languages. The three are close to identical. Sure, there are lots and lots of superficial differences – they optimise in different directions, and that is what ends up making me prefer Perl and you Ruby and still others Python. But their fundamental premises are completely identical so there is no substantial difference in terms of expressiveness, overall. Ruby wins