Yes, we could. Very easily in fact, but we don't. Do you know why we don't bother? Consistancy. It's what Python has that Perl does not. It's what makes Python easier to learn than Perl. It's what makes Python easier to parse than Perl. It's what makes Python easier to test than Perl. It's what makes Python easier to maintain than Perl. It's what keeps me from having to worry about hiring programmers that write camel code for actual projects.

Perl has a lot of great features, but it takes providing multiple options too far. A language with less flexibility can be a very good thing.

So what you are saying is: if we dumb down the language, we can hire people that are not experts while still getting good quality clean code? I don't buy that.I have seen this several times; where a company's code in language X becomes unmaintainable because the code was written by someone who did not know how to program, and then the company hears the sirens' song of being able to get good quality code of non/Jr. programmers because language Y will not let them write bad code, only to find out that it is the programmer and not the language that dictates code quality. So all you end up with when you dumb down a language is a language that cripples experienced programmers while doing nothing to keep bad programmers from writing bad code.

And when you say keeps you from having to worry about programmers from writing Camel code, I take it that you mean that it keeps experienced programmers from writing code that a novice would not be able to grok, a @bar = map {} sort {} map{} @foo for example? But how would python make, let us say, the VJ header compression code easier to read? In perl, the syntax just makes some things easier to read for an expert while being harder for a novice to read.

-- It is the programmer, not the language.

Disclaimer:

I am in no way saying that python is a dumbed down language -- I have not used it before