Re^4: The Limitations of the CPAN

The reason I pointed out that Ruby and Smalltalk do not have these issues is because they are dynamically typed languages that are more comparable to Perl than strong and staticly typed languages like C++. If I need raw performance or tight integration with the underlying OS, C or C++ may be the way to go, but I'd still prefer to limit those to specific domains and write the bulk of the business logic in a dynamic language. As a result, I won't quibble with you regarding C++. My issue is that there are certain classes of problems that Perl has that other dynamic languages don't have and those problems are magnified in larger systems. Telling me that I need to hunt around and find the particular solution for the particular Perl-specific problem is little consolation when that problem goes away by not choosing Perl.

Heck, read what Paul Graham has to say about Lisp. While I certainly don't agree with everything he has to say, I wholeheartedly agree with his "some languages are better" assertion. I know this for a fact. I used to program COBOL.

Cheers,
Ovid

New address of my CGI Course.

Comment on Re^4: The Limitations of the CPAN

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: The Limitations of the CPAN by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Nov 17, 2004 at 19:57 UTC
Ruby most certainly may be better than Perl - I don't know as I don't have that experience in Ruby. I hope I wasn't giving the impression that I think Perl is the be-all-end-all of languages (though I do think it gets closer than most). I too agree with Graham's assertion that some languages are better than others. I too know this for a fact - I have to work with JavaScript on a daily basis. :-) What I am saying is that there are reasons why one should choose a language over another, some of which have little to do with the power of the language. I guess my intial reaction to your post was fueled because you were posting about readily-acknowledged short-comings in Perl. No problem, except you said "XYZ language doesn't have this problem" and didn't demonstrate how that was the case. Nor did you say "And this problem is easily circumvented by doing foobarbaz", which would have helped the rest of us poor schlubs who don't have the choice of changing languages at the moment. Being right, does not endow the right to be rude; politeness costs nothing. Being unknowing, is not the same as being stupid. Expressing a contrary opinion, whether to the individual or the group, is more often a sign of deeper thought than of cantankerous belligerence. Do not mistake your goals as the only goals; your opinion as the only opinion; your confidence as correctness. Saying you know better is not the same as explaining you know better.	[reply]
Re^6: The Limitations of the CPAN by Ovid (Cardinal) on Nov 17, 2004 at 20:06 UTC
Sorry if the post was misleading. I meant to focus on a counter-argument to the "CPAN is everything" argument that I routinely hear. The other shortcomings, I should add, are widely known here on Perlmonks, but I've been surprised (disappointed?) how often I have to point them out in the real world. Cheers, Ovid New address of my CGI Course.	[reply]


P is for Practical
	PerlMonks