Re: Scripting language takes a silicon turn

[Jeff Sheets <jeff.sheets@...>]

On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 07:46 -0800, Chris Marrin wrote:
> > I am also puzzled by the following: is it that I tend to dislike
> > some languages because they are overly hyped, or is it simply
> > because I find them non-aesthetic and/or uninspiring?
> > For scripting, I would always pick one of Icon, Lua, Rexx,
> > Ruby, but not Perl or Python.

It has always seemed to me that the creators and supporters of Perl and
Python have added every permutation of every feature they could find to
their codebase, simply so they could point and shout out, "See! We got
one of those, too!  Nyah!"  What happens, IMHO, is that they end up
looking like the programming equivalent of a suicidal sculptor's attempt
to recreate the nothingness of being in a framework of mismatched
plumbing and porcelain. (Kitchen sinks and all. :)

Lua then, to me, is the programming equivalent of a Roman marble statue
of Artemis. It is obvious what it represents, what it is made of, and
why it was created. Most people can appreciate it. And though it may be
lacking some plumbing here or there, it gets the job done.

But all languages have their downsides. Not all languages have good
points. And some languages, for me, have the one downside that will kill
my desire to use them. That downside is the lack of memorability. I will
always think of a pickle as an object to eat. I have forgotten all the
wierd Perl syntax. I cannot remember Perl or Python, without constantly
looking at a book. I will never forget Lua.

> So you didn't hang out with the popular kids in High School then? :-)

Bah, I didn't hang out with the popular kids in any grade... until they
started hanging out with me. ;)

> Of course, Lua's syntax is STILL quirky (~= instead of !=, really?
> Are you kidding me? :-)

C++ has &.  In college, I saw many students mess up that one thing.
Though it's taken me a while to get used to using ~=, I can look at it
and say, without doubt, that it must mean not equal, because it is not
==. & in C++ is kludgy. It's one of those things in C++ that I avoid,
simply because it seems to me to be a feature for the sake of a feature.
I'll use it in C++ to get the job done, but I won't like it, remember
why it works, etc.  All because ampersand doesn't indicate to me what
that symbol is supposed to mean in C++.  Thankfully I can't remember any
Perl, so I can't provide you with the many examples in Perl that are
even worse to remember.
-- 


JJS
"If Ignorance is Bliss, I'll take the Pain."