for perl wizards.
m.seaman at infracaninophile.co.uk
Fri Oct 9 19:57:19 UTC 2009
Lars Eighner wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Oct 2009, Warren Block wrote:
>> That's twice now people have suggested sed instead of perl. Why? For
>> many uses, perl is a better sed than sed. The regex engine is far
>> more powerful and escapes are much simpler.
> Because sed is stable and perl is getting all OO and flaky. Sed will work
> like sed for so long as there are unix-like systems. It is not clear that
> perl is going to continue to work.
What utter tosh. Perl's Object Oriented features have been in place for years
and, believe it or not, perl programs written for Perl 4 still continue to work
with little or no modification under the very latest perl release, right alongside
the stuff written yesterday that uses all the very latest features. That's a damn
sight better track record than almost any other actively developed language you
There's nothing that forces you to program Perl in an OO style -- procedural
style works just fine. You could probably make a fair stab at writing in a
purely functional style (like Ocaml) if you felt that way inclined.
I get very irritated with the current vogue in certain quarters for doing down
Perl. So what if you personally don't like coding in Perl? No one is holding a
gun to your head and making you do it. Write in what ever language suits you,
but don't try and force me to conform to your prejudices.
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
Kent, CT11 9PW
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 259 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20091009/037eafc1/signature.pgp
More information about the freebsd-questions