Re: hash, a troublemaker?

I think the reasons why Perl has this feature is somehow related to what Larry Wall said,
If the burden of decision making is on the programmer, then it's possible for the programmer to make a mess of things. It's possible for Perl programmers to write messy programs. It's also possible for Perl programmers to write extremely clean, concise, and beautiful programs.
What he never mentioned was, MOST programmers can mess things up so easily
like me :)
I think language sometimes shoud be more strict.

Comment on Re: hash, a troublemaker?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: hash, a troublemaker? by pelagic (Priest) on May 12, 2004 at 08:19 UTC
> I think language sometimes shoud be more strict. I very often use a hash to keep information to identifiers I don't know before they jump into existence. The "strictness" you would prefer is more something for fixed data structures. pelagic	[reply]
Re: Re: hash, a troublemaker? by Doraemon (Beadle) on May 12, 2004 at 14:13 UTC
I believe features like Hash::Util should be embedded into the language itself, rather than add-on module. If the language is too permissive, it'll not only opened to mistakes, but will increase the size of the code itself, because programmer who like strictness (like me) need to add more codes. At this point, i agree with Mr.Stroustroup(C++), that he once suggested (and still standing on it), that this kind of controls should be part of the language itself. The advantages : - easy for beginner (secure by default) - reduce code - clear program Anyway, i'm considering this as suggesting, rather that criticize I'm not saying this is your mistakes, Mr Wall :)	[reply]


Think about Loose Coupling
	PerlMonks