4 ms·
Definitely. I'd say "Programming Perl" is a literary masterpiece. Larry Wall's genius was selling Perl as a literate, witty, expressive antidote to all the Java
by cutler 6y ago
Definitely. I'd say "Programming Perl" is a literary masterpiece. Larry Wall's genius was selling Perl as a literate, witty, expressive antidote to all the Java and C++ cruft of the late 90s (Perl 5). "Programming Perl" should be read alongside "Mastering Regular Expressions" which is another masterpiece. I think Ruby and Clojure are the only language cultures that come close to engaging the whole brain the way Perl 5 did when it was popular. However, while each has a couple of shining stars (Ruby: Matz & DHH, Clojure: Rich Hickey) they don't compare with the sheer number of stars who made up the Perl 5 cast of the early 2000s (Larry Wall, "The Damian" Conway, Chromatic, Curtis Poe, Lincoln Stein, Randall Schwartz, John Orwant, Simon Cozens, Tom Christiansen, Nat Torkington & many more). That really was an entertaining community to be part of and is, like disappearing bookshops, sorely missed. Perl lost a lot of mindshare to Python, famed for its boring predictability and crippled lambdas which the Perl 5 community would never have tolerated. If you want programming to inspire you the way O'Reilly's catalogue of Perl books did in the late 90s/early 2000s I'm not sure there's much apart from Matz and Rich Hickey's work. Their lectures are inspiring but their written output is limited. Go read "Programming Perl" - it's timeless.
- ahartmetz 6y agoWell, I hated "Programming Perl" and stopped reading after 50 pages or so. My favorite language introduction book is the K&R C book, it is of glittering elegance compared to the Perl book (and language)'s "quirky" style. Quirky is the very last thing that you want in a programming language. And I am not even that fond of C, at least with today's alternatives being available.
- cutler 6y agoWhat you want out of a programming language may not be the same as what, for example, DHH or Matz wants. You seem to want minimalism and proximity to the metal whereas someone who appreciates Perl and Ruby is more likely to value expressiveness. Dynamic and statically-typed languages are not in competition with each other. They both have their place.
- ahartmetz 6y agoThere are surely differences in taste. I do like Python for "scripting", small and/or short-lived programs, often used to handle administrative tasks. Python is famously the anti-Perl in many questions of language design.
- lizmat 6y agoActually, I liked both, but for different reasons. 1. There was no Perl yet when I read K&R. 2. "Programming Perl" was more fun.