Re: YAPAS (Yet Another Python Advocacy Story)

["David H. Adler" <dha@panix.com>]

On Mon, Mar 06, 2000 at 03:04:49AM -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
> dha wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 05, 2000 at 05:25:56PM -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
> > > dha wrote:
> > > > Indeed.  Not only does he say 'Many other programs are written in a
> > > > variety of illegible dialects within the family of languages called
> > > > "Perl".', which is clearly incomprehensible (is that an oxymoron?
> > > > :-), 
> > > 
> > > Let's be fair here.  There's beginner's "pidgin" Perl, 
> > > [...levels of perl...]
> > 
> > It is indeed ok.  It is, however not what he's saying.  
> 
> That's how I interpreted it, poorly phrased and misguidingly worded
> as it was....

The clear implication of his comment is "Perl is illegible".  Yes, I
realize that it could be said that he doesn't say precisely that, but
I belive that anyone who thinks someone reading this will go by the
letter rather than the spirit is being quite foolish.  For the record,
I *have* seen obfuscated python.  It is scary.

> > > > I wonder if I should suggest he put that in his pipe and smoke it, or
> > > > if that would be giving it more attention than it deserves... :-/
> > > 
> > > It'll be our loss. 
> > 
> > How so?  I merely meant pointing out what I find to be misconceptions
> > presented as facts in his piece.  C'mon, you know me... I'm not *that*
> > nasty... :-)
> 
> Well, this wasn't a white paper, and it could have benefitted from 
> a little more eyes and level-headedness.

Indeed.  I have now also seen the link from the main page where it
says "why Python, -- not C++, not Java, and certainly not Perl -- the
best contender for a people's program".  Although I agree w/The Larry
that the "Perl? Ha, Ha, use Python" ad was, in the final analysis,
more funny than damaging, I do think that it's a joke that is getting
a bit tired... :-/

> If, we see this as an opportunity to address the flaws in Perl that
> other people ascribe to it, then we can improve Perl for the long haul,
> or at least determine where Perl doesn't belong.

I'm all in favor for the right tool for the right job *and* the right
tool for the right programmer.  Some of this article strikes me quite
firmly as FUD, however.  Perl is certainly not the perfect tool for
everything or everyone, but to dismiss it out of hand as Mr. Prescod
seems to is not, IME, anything like a balanced view.

> No argument there.  I didn't find any disinformation though, just a 
> lot of misdirected frustration with Perl/C++.

Hm... perl is illegible, perl is totally alien if you have no unix
background... sounds like disinformation (or at least
*mis*information) to me.  Really, the only uncertainty I have is
whether it is motivated by ignorance or prejudice.  (And I don't mean
that as pejoratively as it probably sounds)

dha

-- 
David H. Adler - <dha@panix.com> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
"This is Mace's planet.  We Just Live here."
**Majordomo list services provided by PANIX <URL:http://www.panix.com>**
**To Unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe phl" to majordomo@lists.pm.org**