use Perl

• Syntax (Score:1)

  by stu42j (6348)

  He is mostly just complaining about the syntax. So, he is saying that:

  ${$arrayRef}[0]=4;

  Is uglier than (I agree):

  array[0]=4;

  And

  $x=func(1,\@array);

  Is uglier than (meh):

  x=func(1,array)

  Reference handling is one of the few things I really don't like about Perl. In a high level language like Perl, you shouldn't have to worry about what's a reference what isn't (most of the time). It goes against DWIM.
  
  He also complains about having to change the prefix on the array to access the individual element.
  • Re:Syntax (Score:1)

    by phaylon (6115) <reversethis-{ta.474} {ta} {sr}> on 2007.09.28 10:31 (#58101) Homepage Journal

    Honestly, I don't see a problem with the references. You can always write $foo->[3] to dereference the array. And I really don't agree that references and non-references should be interchangable. Since non-refs and refs behave differently, you _have_ to differentiate them. Otherwise this would just scream "action at a distance" to me.

    I can however, understand why non-Perl people have problems with the changing sigils. Because they aren't used to it. Personally, I like it, but I can see why it was decided to be changed.

    It just seems to me that he's complaining that Perl has a different syntax than Python. He can of course do that, but when he starts saying this is why Python is better, it gets ridiculous. I won't even start ranting about the thousands of years old problem that people think they are themselves a statistical majority :)

    --
    Ordinary morality is for ordinary people. -- Aleister Crowley

    Reply to This

    Parent

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by stu42j (6348)

      Yeah, it seems like most Lanuage A is better than Lanuage B arguments are really just Lanauge B is different from what I'm used to.
      • Re: (Score:1)

        by phaylon (6115)

        Exactly :) That's why I bow before those people who try to transform those silly discussions into "I like $x about $y" and "I hate $x about $y" thoughts. Those are the rants and raves everybody can learn something from. Especially if they are written by people who actually work with that language of course :)

        --
        Ordinary morality is for ordinary people. -- Aleister Crowley
    • Dereferencing (was: Syntax) (Score:1)

      by jplindstrom (594)

      Well, when it comes to dereferencing syntax this isn't a problem:

      my @names = keys %$name_age;

      but this is clearly uglier than it should be:

      my @names = keys %{$self->name_age};

      especially when combined with other curly constructs.
      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Aristotle (5147)

        What’s really annoying is that there’s not even any reason for the prototype on keys (nor, really, on most other functions). Even if keys $foo will blow up at compile time, keys %$foo won’t – but that doesn’t mean the reference is a hash ref. The only reason for keys to have a prototype is because of how the parser works; a mere artefact.

        Context-sensitive sigils worked for Perl 4 because it doesn’t have references; in Perl 5 they are a pointless wart.