Post #563590
2026-03-07 02:47 UTC
Replies (2)
-
@wrog@mastodon.murkworks.net 2026-03-07 02:50
@dougmerritt@mathstodon.xyz @kentpitman@climatejustice.social @ramin_hal9001@fe.disroot.org @screwlisp@gamerplus.org @cdegroot@mstdn.ca To be sure, my Perl tends to be more structured. On the other hand, I also hate Moose (Perl's attempt at CLOS) and have thus far succeeded in keeping that out of my life. I also remember there being a time in my life when I could read and understand APL. But if you do think it's possible to come up with some kind of useful formal definition/criterion for "expressiveness", go for it. I'll believe it when I see it. 11/11
-
@dougmerritt@mathstodon.xyz 2026-03-07 19:02
@wrog > I'm also guessing TECO wouldn't have existed without there being people who managed to wrap their brains around it and found it to be expressive and concise. I myself never got there (also never really tried TBH), I'm one of those people, BTW. My proof is that I wrote a closed-loop stick figure ASCII animation juggling three balls. As with any complex TECO thing, the resulting code was write-only -- and that was always the problem with even mildly powerful TECO macros. Perl at its worst can be described as write-only line noise, yes, but in my experience is *STILL* better than TECO! I am indeed fortunate to be able to stick with Emacs and Vi. @kentpitman @ramin_hal9001 @screwlisp @cdegroot