[Gllug] re: OSS CMSs

[Aaron Trevena]

On 4/29/05, David Damerell <damerell at chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> On Friday, 29 Apr 2005, Nix wrote:
> >But the problem you're complaining about is that using differing subsets
> >of a language that others might not be familiar with makes it harder for
> >those others to understand the code.
> >Surely this is true whether or not it is a good choice of language subset,
> >and whether or not the subset is one you've defined yourself?
> 
> Yes. What I'm driving at is a language with few possible subsets -
> like C - suffers from this problem much less than one with very many,
> like Perl. Most C programmers are familiar with essentially the same
> bits of the language; the same is not true of Perl programmers.

I'm sorry - just what are you basing this on?

There aren't that many subsets of perl, in fact the syntax is fully
covered in the Camel Book, including all the core methods.

I haven't met anybody yet who struggled with perl because they were
using a different subset to everybody else. This seems to be nonsense.

As you learn more of any language you learn how to use it better, and
you spend less time thinking about the syntax and more about the API
of the library or system you work with than how your language works.

Some languages allow your productivity to continue increasing, like
perl, others don't, like PHP and ASP.

A.
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug