Bugzilla Talk:Languages: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
== On Perl5 cons ==
== On Perl5 cons ==


I think everyone agrees that Perl5 is difficult for large, maintainable applications, and no one wants to advocate continuing to use it. But still, there's some red herrings:
""I think everyone agrees that Perl5 is difficult for large, maintainable applications, and no one wants to advocate continuing to use it. ""
 
Hello? WTF? Whoever said that know nothing about large maintainable projects.
 
I think that every experienced Perl programmer would agreee that Perl 5 works wonderfully for large maintainable applications, and are very happy to continue to use it?
 
-ajt
 


* Certain syntax things are confusing for new users
* Certain syntax things are confusing for new users
** Granted. But it seems that there would be a strong expectation that anyone programming in a particular language would be far beyond the "new user" stage before they attempted anything big/maintainable/etc -- regardless of the language being used.
** Granted. But it seems that there would be a strong expectation that anyone programming in a particular language would be far beyond the "new user" stage before they attempted anything big/maintainable/etc -- regardless of the language being used.
*** Ideally, but it's not always the case. And sometimes people have used Perl for years and still don't understand some of the things I listed on the page. But I do see your point there. -mkanat
*** Ideally, but it's not always the case. And sometimes people have used Perl for years and still don't understand some of the things I listed on the page. But I do see your point there. -mkanat
**** Then they aren't really learning the language - perhaps you mean some people who rarely do Perl and spend more time writing php or python, find that it's a bit different to what they're used to.
* Perl doesn't check the type of arguments to subroutines.
* Perl doesn't check the type of arguments to subroutines.
** Given that it's a typeless language, what is there to check?
** Given that it's a typeless language, what is there to check?
*** Well, it'd be nice to be able to enforce that the argument was a particular class, or be able to enforce that a reference is an arrayref or hashref without having to do that manually. -mkanat
*** Well, it'd be nice to be able to enforce that the argument was a particular class, or be able to enforce that a reference is an arrayref or hashref without having to do that manually. -mkanat
**** There are signatures for limited checking, but it's best to validate parameters properly (plenty of ways to do this from very simple to very powerful on CPAN or manually) instead of just assuming that because something is 'a string' that it's ok. -ajt
* <tt>$$foo[1]</tt> and <tt>$foo->[1]</tt> mean the same thing.
* <tt>$$foo[1]</tt> and <tt>$foo->[1]</tt> mean the same thing.
** This is analogous to a C/C++ construct where <tt>ix->member</tt> and <tt>(*ix).member</tt> mean the same thing.
** This is analogous to a C/C++ construct where <tt>ix->member</tt> and <tt>(*ix).member</tt> mean the same thing.
*** Yeah, which is also confusing in C to many people. :-) -mkanat
*** Yeah, which is also confusing in C to many people. :-) -mkanat
**** No it's just you and a couple of others ;) - ajt
* You can't make subroutines private in a class.
* You can't make subroutines private in a class.
** Not true:
** Not true:
Line 28: Line 38:
  }
  }
*** True, and I've seen that example many places. Not exactly intuitive, though. And does that work under mod_perl?
*** True, and I've seen that example many places. Not exactly intuitive, though. And does that work under mod_perl?
**** There is no reason for it not to work under mod_perl, that question makes me think you don't understand how mod_perl works - ajt
**** Private methods aren't really required in Perl very often at all.


== On Python cons ==
== On Python cons ==
21

edits

Navigation menu