Why use Perl when we've got Python?!

[Tim Greer]

"John W. Stevens" wrote:
> 
> > In comp.lang.perl.misc,
> >     "John W. Stevens" <jstevens at basho.fc.hp.com> writes:
> > :Polymorphism requires both OO training, and discipline to use, but if
> > :used correctly, it is very powerful.
> >
> > No disagreements.
> >
> > But I can't help but wonder: Is this how you keep out 99% of the
> > accidental programmers, the ones who use Perl?
> 
> Who says I keep anybody out of anything?  I teach OO.  Not C++, or
> Smalltalk. . . OO.
> 
> > If you require OO training
> > and discipline, then you set the bar at the gate untenably high.
> 
> An opinion.  Duly noted, of course.  But still an opinion.

Just as yours is, not a very good argument, is it?

> > Perl remains proudly pedestrian in its roots.
> 
> What does that mean?

You're embarrassing yourself, you just don't realize it.
 
> > It doesn't require a Computer
> > Science degree to use.
> 
> Neither does Python.  But, why in heaven's name would you talk first
> about competence, then state it as a benefit that Perl can be used
> by the untrained?

Because it's inherently easier to get started on and have a working
program then most other languages. In a short amount of time, you can
get far, yet at the same time, you can only get "so far", until you need
to put any real effort into it, so you can learn the more complex
features of the language to your advantage, which can only be obtained
with a certain amount of comprehension and competence. How did that slip
by you? How is that different from any other language? Any idiot can
learn at least _some_ of the language and create a program to do a few
simple to intermediate tasks, but they have to posses a certain amount
of intellect to further their knowledge. 
 
> Why, in heaven's name, would you prefer Joe Blow (who has worked for
> five years as a butcher) to perform your brain surgery, to a Medical
> Doctor with a degree in Neuro Surgery?

I don't think anyone would, you're blowing that out of proportion, John.
Think about it. Why would you deny any help from "Joe Blow" to assist
you in changing your tire? That doesn't mean you'll allow him to rebuild
your engine. Refer to the above statement.

> > This, too, is a feature.  Formal training is
> > optional.
> 
>    "Formal traing is optional"
> 
> Now, what defines the difference between "formal" and "informal"
> training?

Refer to my above statements. I'm sure you'll figure it out. :-)

> And, how do you figure that OO is more difficult, more
> formal than what-ever-it-is that you are talking about?

Who said that? However, would you suggest a person start right in trying
to learn C++ and tell them how it's not important (or that it's
better/wiser) to learn C first? Taking the proper steps, learning one
thing before you learn something more indepth/complex perhaps? That's
the first thing that comes to mind for an answer when I read your
paragraph. Then again, admittingly, I'm failing to understand what you
mean to say in this post, so maybe you can clarify?
-- 
Regards,
Tim Greer   : webmaster at chatbase.com  | software at linkworm.com
The ChatBase: http://www.chatbase.com | 250,000+ hits daily Worldwide!
TRG Software: http://www.linkworm.com | CGI scripts in Perl/C, & more.
Unix/NT/Novell Administration, Security, Web Design, ASP, SQL, & more.
Freelance Programming & Consulting, Musician, Martial Arts, +Sciences.