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.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • by barries (2159) on 2003.05.16 13:36 (#20207)
    People seem to think that, for example, one looping construct should suffice for all needs. They don't realize that you want different constructs for different needs.

    Different looping constructs may be used to acheive the same end, yet their means may differ; there are often memory, performance, or maintainability (ie readability/debugability/ease of alteration, etc) tradeoffs involved.

    Even though TIMTOWTDI may seem profligate, in reality there are often subtleties at play that are not manifest in the source text of the program.

    Personally, I think perl5 doesn't have enough looping constructs...

    - Barrie

    • People seem to think that, for example, one looping construct should suffice for all needs. They don't realize that you want different constructs for different needs.

      Yep. Someone said later in that thread that OOO is fundementally wrong at the language design level, using Scheme as an example. Specifically, the idea that you do not need iteration whatsoever, since all iteration can be expressed in terms of recursive functions.

      Don't even get me started on the fallacy that the only data structure yo