|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 12:52, Fred K Ollinger wrote:
> > I don't get all the perl/python/ruby/etc. Why do we need 25 different
> > scripting languages? Worse yet, I have to install them because
> > SOMETHING will use ruby, something else will use perl.. yet another
> > thing will want python.. some other script will want zsh, etc. There
> > are compilers for a reason ;)
>
> Can't python compile programs? I never used python, but I might learn.
I don't know for 100% sure, but my understanding was that python is just
an interpreted scripting language? If anybody knows different, let us
know?
> I
> use perl and sh for my scripting needs now. They work fine esp as perl is
> in most default linux installs while python/ruby is not. I could be wrong
> as rh likes python a lot (as does progeny) for their installer. Debian
> uses perl as day to day glue, which IMHO is bad, netbsd got rid of all
> perl dependencies and I think debian should, too. Perl is a hole, IMHO.
well many of the packages I install needed ruby or python, so it seems
to me that if you install very many things, you are required to have all
three (and tcl, etc.).
> Compiled scripting langs is good.
I wouldn't call it a scripting language then... To me, if it's simple
enough, I will make a bash script, if it's not, I will write a pascal
program ;)
> > I don't think ease is the most important factor, but the important part
> >...
> > design to some extent. What, we don't want production applications
> > designed well, only research ones? ;)
>
> No, but Larry Wall said that programmers are smart and don't like to be
> coerced (some excuse for the mess that is perl, perl is my favorite lang,
> right now, btw). If there's something a programmer can't do, then they'll
> figure out a way around it resulting in even uglier code than before. I
> would like to have good programming habits, but I would probably make an
> ugly mess at first w/ pascal, you probably saw my c++ code. :)
Well I think it's just that people get used to something and are
stubborn. Everything else "sucks" even if it is better, because it is
not what you are used to. That's why I learned other languages even
after knowing pascal. If I talk bad about something, it usually means I
know something about it. C to me certainly has its uses, C++, I am not
so sure. What I would like to see is a compiler system that can support
mixtures of languages for compatibility's sake. For example, Turbo 7
for DOS could have ASM procedures. I would like to see FreePascal
support C procedures (err.. I mean.. functions.. even if they are void..
he he) . The compiler could stream those procedures to gcc, get a .o,
and then seamlessly compile that into the program. Then I could cut an
paste C code since it's common, and use pascal for high level control
and OOP.
> Anyway, why don't I learn pascal? I don't see too many jobs that way. Yes,
Well I didn't learn computers for working... (I am assuming job =
employment here), working on computers is something that just tends
naturally.
> this is a chicken-and-egg problem, and I'm not helping. As soon as I
> perfect my c++ and I learn php and python, then I might look at pascal.
lol. Well PHP is easy, if it is programming at all. Python, I don't
know, so I can't say. If you know C or some similar compiled language,
starting in pascal will be easy (but perhaps slightly frustrating
because of the fact you have to lay things out with some order, and not
play dirty tricks like assigning different types to each other).
> I
> have heard that mac os was in pascal. Not the best example of what pascal
> can do right.
I heard Finder was made in pascal at least. I think Mac OS finder is
pretty cool. Look how windows and linux have essentially been trying to
copy it for years. (Os/2 did a good job on their own system with PM
though).
> OK, I just stated my opinions b/c I was asked, hope not to start a couple
> of flame wars. Everone's favorite tool is the best, but it could be done a
> bit better.
I don't think most people on the list are that sensitive about this sort
of thing. I think freedom of choice is a good thing. I mean, If you
are wizard at programming GNOME apps in FORTRAN and COBOL .. more power
to you! ;)
> Fred
--- noah silva
______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug
|
|