Perl Software Developer and Database programmer

--- Peter Corlett <abusecabal.org.uk> wrote:

> Lusercop <`the.lusercop'lusercop.net> wrote:
> [...]
> > I'm not trolling. I really think that writing
subs that pretend to
> be map
> > and grep or similar is not a way to, in general,
write maintainable
> > code...
> 
> Python and Java are that way --->

Whoa now, let's not be using the "J" word like
that!

> 
> Perl is not always elegant, and it may have mantraps in
dusty
> corners, but
> it usually gets the job done and it often does a good
job if treated
> with
> respect.
> 
> Avoiding idiomatic Perl because you can't understand
it, or have such
> a low
> opinion of Perl programmers and think they can't
understand it, is
> doing
> everybody an injustice.

Could be wrong, but I don't think "idiomatic"
is the same as
"dogmatic." Besides, doesn't Perl have more
than enough idioms to go
around? 

I stick to "my" whenever possible,
"our" when I need to, and "local"
only when any other way would make the code a burden to
maintain . So
far, I think I've used "local" three times in
production code over
seven years. And yet, I've never heard folks complain that
my code
veered too far from the common idioms.

Kind Regards,

Brian Wisti
http://coolnamehere.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

On 23 Feb 2006, at 18:56, Brian Wisti wrote:
> Could be wrong, but I don't think
"idiomatic" is the same as
> "dogmatic." Besides, doesn't Perl have
more than enough idioms to go
> around?

idiomatic != dogmatic and 'enough idioms to go around'
means nothing 

-- 
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net

----- Original Message ----
From: Andy Armstrong <andyhexten.net>
To: bond.pm Perl M[ou]ngers <bond.pmbond.pm.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 2:51:39 PM
Subject: Re: [JOB] Perl Software Developer and Database
programmer

On 23 Feb 2006, at 18:56, Brian Wisti wrote:
> Could be wrong, but I don't think
"idiomatic" is the same as
> "dogmatic." Besides, doesn't Perl have
more than enough idioms to go
> around?

idiomatic != dogmatic and 'enough idioms to go around'
means nothing 

-- 
Andy Armstrong, hexten.net

The "idiomatic vs. dogmatic" silliness was a
reaction to the "if you don't like the way I use
Perl, use something else" vibe I got from your
message. So was the "enough idioms to go around"
silliness. I was trying to find new ways to say
"TMTOWTDI."

-- Brian Wisti
http://coolnamehere.com/