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.
The issues are... (Score:1)
So how are Modern Perl and Enlightened Perl different from the other similar initiatives?
PBP was the first real step in the direction of "modernizing" Perl. It was a book that showed people that Perl isn't a toy, and isn't a "write-only" language. (Unfortunately some of the advice in the book was just wrong, like using Class::Std. What?)
(I have never heard of Perl Enterprise Edition, and I am no marketing expert, but somehow I don't think "pee" is the way to make Perl popular again. Although it would pa
PBP is great, but it's sad it is needed (Score:1)
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
Re: (Score:1)
If you think there is any programming language that is not like this, you have not used that language long enough.
Anything can "trip up" programmers that don't know how to program. The semantics of local are quite clear. (Dynamic binding versus my's lexical binding. Not hard.)
Re:PBP is great, but it's sad it is needed (Score:1)
Oh, having dynamically scoped variables is very useful and not difficult to understand. I was referring to the semantics of 'local $x;' in particular. What does that statement do? Is it useful and clear, or is it a fairly useless behaviour and a gotcha for the unwary? PBP makes a good argument for the latter.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
Reply to This
Parent