[Gllug] More Microsoft patents

[Andy Farnsworth]

Got it, now I understand.  I learned programming from the traditional
background.  Line number basic on the Sinclair ZX80 and TRS-80, then on to
Applesoft Basic, then formally with Pascal, C, Lisp, ADA, C++, and then
Perl.  This, combined with my experience in writing code as a consultant
where my customers are much happier[0] with easy to read and maintain code
has allowed me to use perl effectively while still maintaining it's
readability and maintainability.  Most "Perl Hackers" that look at my code
immediately start to point out ways to make it better/shorter/more compact
and invariably harder to maintain.  I have not done any comparisons, but I
believe that the performance difference between using a perlism and coding
it out is usually minimal.  There are some exceptions, such as using a hash
to search a list (especially a large list) rather than coding a search
yourself.

[0] - Happy customers means more work, the lifeblood of consultants.

Andy Farnsworth

-----Original Message-----
From: gllug-admin at linux.co.uk [mailto:gllug-admin at linux.co.uk]On Behalf
Of Doug Winter
Sent: February 12 2003 13:18
To: gllug at linux.co.uk
Subject: Re: [Gllug] More Microsoft patents


On Wed 12 Feb Andy Farnsworth wrote:
> > Perl's "write only" nature immediately rules it out as a
> > serious language for implementing a project, IMHO.
>
> What do you mean by this statement?

It's impossible to read perl.  This is why I've stopped using it
completely.  Even my own code confuses the hell out of me.

doug.

--
key 1024D/6973E2CF print 2C95 66AD 1596 37D2 41FC  609F 76C0 A4EC 6973 E2CF
http://www.britishsteal.com                             doug at pigeonhold.com


-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug