From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 6 12:20:56 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 B3D341065670 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 12:20:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-fx0-f225.google.com (mail-fx0-f225.google.com [209.85.220.225]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B4FF8FC1A for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 12:20:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxm25 with SMTP id 25so78489fxm.3 for ; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 05:20:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NnTLU55cVci/EyNSO/hApJGY9aMzc1tp36bXvJsLhO0=; b=dDnLV9egnLxnR/xFNBu2oLcsYWzQO6/M0q9bvH05L0esyYCVPwwWc/Pc8xZbOjOfLm 0ihEyJ929tVb+Z+POMPpcNaabRc2AOelcGOKTBlRBToQ1X/0HxuxDVMPzKbULAxNvWWP 3YOfG7MOVRHtPRs1H5lATCbNMidSi5LEDuEfI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=KvFVmR7+ziu1MusnksEipk3KyaLYp0om3Ex28Ad/WNfVp0ja3au1L20Wqb8gtY6tyD 9Fa6T3lHyUeG2r74WNWeNDznvazLEUjsvd6KIYCrDP8jB+KIbrie9WS9OysOC3+tLMxM ESwUHYjL2r6FO3q6K3YCdXt5OZgn7RfDhIUys= Received: by 10.223.42.22 with SMTP id q22mr7297495fae.40.1270556454892; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 05:20:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com (bb-87-81-140-128.ukonline.co.uk [87.81.140.128]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 18sm1305710fkq.34.2010.04.06.05.20.51 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 06 Apr 2010 05:20:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 13:20:49 +0100 From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20100406132049.641b9edf@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <20100406015544.GA21119@guilt.hydra> 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> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.5 (GTK+ 2.18.7; i386-portbld-freebsd8.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 12:20:56 -0000 On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 19:55:44 -0600 Chad Perrin wrote: > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 05:36:32PM +0100, RW wrote: > > > > IMO this is a bad mistake that other languages were quite right not > > to copy - a test shouldn't come after a block of code unless it's > > evaluated after the block (as in repeat...until) > > There are more things in heav'n and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt > of by designers of eagerly evaluated prefix notation languages. And most of them are obscure for good reasons. Just because a a syntax fits into a classification scheme doesn't make it a good idea. Natural languages are mostly driven by spoken usage, in which people firm-up half-formed ideas as they speak - this is not a good model for programming languages. If you are hacking out a quick and dirty script it may be convenient to type the decision after the action, but it don't I think it promotes good quality software. Imperative languages have a natural order of decision followed by action, and code is most easily readable if the syntax doesn't try to subvert that.