From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 6 18:07:25 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3FEE1065675 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 18:07:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from merlyn@stonehenge.com) Received: from red.stonehenge.com (red.stonehenge.com [208.79.95.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B96368FC1D for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 18:07:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by red.stonehenge.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 696117A15; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 11:07:25 -0700 (PDT) From: merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) To: Chuck Swiger References: <4BB8108A.9080104@FreeBSD.org> <1270371713.5861.98.camel@tao.thought.org> <86aatjnsts.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <861vevnsow.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <20100404163353.GA15198@guilt.hydra> <20100404201442.b456044e.freebsd@edvax.de> <4BB9A5ED.3040309@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20100405173632.739a0c42@gumby.homeunix.com> <20100406015544.GA21119@guilt.hydra> <20100406132049.641b9edf@gumby.homeunix.com> <86wrwkiunp.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <2EE33758-C39C-41DC-B6A8-B34CF6B3B25A@mac.com> x-mayan-date: Long count = 12.19.17.4.10; tzolkin = 2 Oc; haab = 3 Pop Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 11:07:25 -0700 In-Reply-To: <2EE33758-C39C-41DC-B6A8-B34CF6B3B25A@mac.com> (Chuck Swiger's message of "Tue, 06 Apr 2010 11:00:34 -0700") Message-ID: <86k4sk1mle.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: RW , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: perl qstn... X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 18:07:25 -0000 >>>>> "Chuck" == Chuck Swiger writes: Chuck> Let's suppose you want to display one message if debugging is Chuck> enabled, and a shorter message if it is not. Then you wouldn't have used this construct. >> If you don't like all this freedom, there's always Python. :) Chuck> Yes, Perl lets you innovate a remarkable number of ways of Chuck> solving the same problem using syntax that varies from clean and Chuck> maintainable to constructs which even the original author won't Chuck> understand without effort a few months later. It seems to be Chuck> uncommon for one to write unreadable Python code; I'm not sure Chuck> additional freedom to write obfuscated code would be as Chuck> beneficial as one may assume.... I call shenanigans: False dichotomy. Perl has *many* options that are all clear and readable, and some that aren't. Python has a *few* options that are all clear and readable, and some that aren't. You may not appreciate that freedom. Others do. With freedom comes responsibility. If that's not for you, Perl's not for you. -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion