3 ms·
Which is fine, because that is merely a small part of the point. Using better languages is "normal", and we already have a 20 year history of doing it with Perl
by techdragon 12y ago
Which is fine, because that is merely a small part of the point. Using better languages is "normal", and we already have a 20 year history of doing it with Perl, and a nearly twenty year history of doing it with Python, the larger point being, "anyone writing these scripts knows how the hash bang works". In my mind, adding to the complexity of a system by requiring Haskell and this library is counterproductive when the goal us to improve maintenance efficiency.
- imanaccount247 12y agoThat makes absolutely no sense. You are complaining that a haskell library, written for people who use haskell, requires haskell. Python code requires python, perl code requires perl, ruby code requires ruby. So?