3 ms·
OK, I admit it was a cheap shot. But I'm not the only one in the thread making it. And the quote is definitely bizarre. Can you explain how it's related to P
by cmccabe 13y ago
OK, I admit it was a cheap shot. But I'm not the only one in the thread making it. And the quote is definitely bizarre. Can you explain how it's related to Perl?
I agree that Perl has done a very good job with backwards compatibility. I have run many ancient Perl scripts that all work fine, and yes, CPAN is huge. I never liked the language, but that for other reasons, not worth going into here. Feel free to mod me down or whatever, just speaking what is on my mind.
- berntb 13y ago>>OK, I admit it was a cheap shot. But I'm not the only one in the thread making it. Thanks for making HN a bit more like bad Reddit today, with even more brainless language wars! [Edit: Seriously, why even write if you have nothing to add but a "cheap shot" -- which is even written by others ("not the only one")!? Do you try to destroy this website?] [Edit 2: I realize that the language wars idiots in some communities usually votes up comments like this about Perl, but take some damn responsibility for HN quality. Karma is not money.] >>Can you explain how [the quote is] related to Perl? If you're curious, please check the comment by Mithaldu, written before my first comment.
- mpyne 13y ago> OK, I admit it was a cheap shot. But I'm not the only one in the thread making it. "I wasn't the only one" is a very weak justification for actions. Either way, why does the quote have to be related to Perl? I've been reading Stroustroup's 4th Edition of TC++PL and it has quotes at the beginning of every chapter, not all of which pertain directly to C++. Is that not Stroustroup's right as the author to choose whichever quote he feels best appropriate?