[ale] Language Jihad!

[Wandered Inn]

Fletch wrote:

>         There are some problems that a procedural approach is a better
> fit than an OOP one (and there's some where a functional approach is
> better than either).  It's not cheating to use a saw to cut wood
> rather than a hammer.  With Java, you only get a big mallet; with C++
> you at least get a claw hammer so you can pull the nails out of your
> foot.  :)

Problem with that is that people will then polymorph it to death.  Next,
it drives a concrete nail, then wooden stakes, then screws, before you
know it you've got: car.hammer, cause you 'drive' a car.

> With perl, you get the Swiss Army chainsaw that includes
> both a mallet and claw hammer along with all the other gadgetry you
> might need.

This is true, along with the fact that you get 4 different mallets you
can use on the same thing.

> 
>         At any rate, don't limit yourself to one paradigm or one
> language.  Knowing several different flavours lets you choose the
> right tool for the job.  Why be a unilingual boor, when you can easily
> be a programmatical polyglot? (and with perl you can be so in several
> languages simultaneously from the same program :)

True, but don't go mixing your paradigms within your code, it get's
confusing as well as ugly.

--
Until later: Geoffrey		esoteric at denali.atlnet.com

"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds.
The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit
to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his
intelligence." - Albert Einstein
--
To unsubscribe: mail majordomo at ale.org with "unsubscribe ale" in message body.