4 ms·

You're the second person to mention that perl doesn't have pointers; references are not strictly speaking pointers but functionally very similar. I think it's p

by seldo 16y ago

You're the second person to mention that perl doesn't have pointers; references are not strictly speaking pointers but functionally very similar. I think it's pretty obvious those are what I was referring to, and disputing the naming seems like nit-picking. Many of PHP's basic functions do not return objects, therefore method chaining frequently doesn't work. It would have been more correct to say that I want "everything is an object" to be a feature of the language. Lambdas only recently turned up in PHP (though I'm pleased to see them!). My point is that in PHP these features are being shoehorned in late in life, and it seems like a language which was designed with the expectation of these features would be a better choice at this point. And finally, yes, I want a language that assumes everything I will be building is an MVC web app, and builds the necessary infrastructure at the language level, with the performance and stability gains that implies, rather than having it built as a framework on top of the language. It seems weird, I realize, but no more weird than PHP seemed in 1995, with its assumption that everything you'd be writing was a web page.

bl4k 16y ago
I just finished reading past "Forward Ruby on Rails". I started writing down couter-points, and realized my list was longer than your article - so I deleted it to tell you this: You seriously need to edit this post, or just take it down.
chromatic 16y ago
references are not strictly speaking pointers but functionally very similar I have more than a passing familiarity with C and Perl. References and pointers are very different. For example, you have to know where you allocated the memory pointed to to work with pointers effectively. You can also lie to the compiler about the type of pointer. You can also do math with pointers. These are very useful things to do in C (or assembly or C++ or whichever languages give you access to raw memory), but you don't have to do any of those things in Perl because you don't have access to raw memory. Similarly you can get into a circular reference situation with references that you won't normally find in C unless you have a specific type of garbage collector. disputing the naming seems like nit-picking Accuracy is important in programming. The difference between lightning and lightning bugs is not merely degree.

by seldo 16y ago

bl4k 16y ago

I just finished reading past "Forward Ruby on Rails". I started writing down couter-points, and realized my list was longer than your article - so I deleted it to tell you this: You seriously need to edit this post, or just take it down.

chromatic 16y ago

references are not strictly speaking pointers but functionally very similar I have more than a passing familiarity with C and Perl. References and pointers are very different. For example, you have to know where you allocated the memory pointed to to work with pointers effectively. You can also lie to the compiler about the type of pointer. You can also do math with pointers. These are very useful things to do in C (or assembly or C++ or whichever languages give you access to raw memory), but you don't have to do any of those things in Perl because you don't have access to raw memory. Similarly you can get into a circular reference situation with references that you won't normally find in C unless you have a specific type of garbage collector. disputing the naming seems like nit-picking Accuracy is important in programming. The difference between lightning and lightning bugs is not merely degree.