3 ms·

Edit: adding here since I can't edit the original article. I hope the tone didn't come off as condescending or too argumentative. I was just doing my best to e

Edit: adding here since I can't edit the original article. I hope the tone didn't come off as condescending or too argumentative. I was just doing my best to essentially say that all software stinks in it's own way (including both Python & Perl). The few times I've reached for Perl over the years, it has worked fine. Some of the issues such as having a fairly primitive OO system out of the box without reaching for Moo or Moose on CPAN are more than addressed with the very advanced Raku (formerly Perl6), but at this point, that's a perl inspired sister language and not a viable upgrade path.

heresie-dabord 5y ago
> a fairly primitive OO system out of the box I will argue that it isn't primitive, but that it is composable and as lean as you want it to be. If I want a dict with just two methods, I can build it easily and with small memory usage. (This is important when scaling objects into the hundreds of thousands... or more!) TBH, Perl5 OO is easy and tractable. I would agree that the "bless" artefact is unusual, but it does make sense from the point of view of C structs. Oh, as far as REPLs go, there are some easy solutions for Perl, from trivial to more complex. Python's REPL is limited because it doesn't handle multi-line structures well. That is in part a consequence of using whitespace as a logical operator.