| Mental on Tue, 4 Jan 2000 10:31:40 -0500 (EST) |
|
On Tue, Jan 04, 2000 at 10:12:04AM -0500, Michael W. Ryan wrote: > On Tue, 4 Jan 2000, Walt Mankowski wrote: > > > "The very fact that it's possible to write messy programs in Perl > > is also what makes it possible to write programs that are cleaner > > in Perl than they could ever be in a language that attempts to > > enforce cleanliness." > > -- Larry Wall, Linux World 1999 > > I hope you understand when I suggest taking this with a grain of salt when > you consider that readability is, I believe, one of Perl's biggest > complaints and Larry didn't create the language. The origin I was > referring to was the purpose to create quick, one-off scripts. > > Also, it doesn't matter how much *potential* for readable code is there. > If you give people the means to write quickly by using hard-to-read code, > they'll still tend to do it. Perl wasn't designed to be readable; it was > designed to let you do something quickly. Python was designed to be > readable; it was determined that promoting readability was more important > than knocking off scripts in 5 seconds. Hm. When you're talking about readability.... its more a matter of style. I maintain perl code on a daily basis. A badly written program is badly written in any language. Python isnt a silver bullet for writing decent code. It seems like it makes it easier, but bad habits are bad habits. I'm not really contradicting you, I'm just saying that you can write impossible to understand code no matter what. Mental -- "you make insanity respectable." --Helcat on the subject of Mental. Attachment:
pgpHnA0zjSEsL.pgp
|
|