From: Robert Dober Date: 2007-07-24T14:47:34+09:00 Subject: Re: Taking the bull by its horns On 7/24/07, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: > Chad Perrin wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 05:31:44AM +0900, Robert Dober wrote: > >> On 7/23/07, Chad Perrin wrote: > >>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 01:30:23AM +0900, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: > >>>> Kaldrenon wrote: > >>>>> Yet another male (Maybe YAM will replace YAPH some day? *sigh*) > >>>>> > >>>>> age: 19 > >>>>> > >>>>> background: BASIC, Visual Basic, the scripting language included in > >>>>> TI-83 Plus graphing calculators, C++, Java > >>>>> > >>>>> Presently learning: Perl and Ruby, with plans to learn Lisp, Lua, and > >>>>> Ada. My goal is to become a true polyglot. > >>>> Unless there's a financial reason, I'd skip Perl and focus on Ruby. And > >>>> Scheme is probably a better tutorial language than (Common) Lisp. Check > >>>> out "Dr. Scheme", for example. > >>> Unless you're Ed, I wouldn't skip Perl. I actually like the the > >>> language. Why limit yourself? > >> Another variation on the perl theme: Wait for Perl 6 though -- you > >> will be in good company too ;). > > > > I don't think it's necessary to wait for Perl 6 -- but I'm certainly > > looking forward to it. > > > > I'm just totally bored with Perl -- Perl 4 was a great improvement over > awk, but I only maintain old code in it. I don't like to write new Perl > code, and I am not willing to wait for Perl 6 when there are other > languages I like -- Erlang, Ruby, and maybe Smalltalk (assuming a decent > Smalltalk shows up on the AMD64 in Gentoo before I die. :) Perl 5.8 is > good enough, Ruby and R are better Well I dunno if I followed correctly there will be nothing like Perl6 elsewhere, it might be overkill, we'll see :) Robert > > -- We're on a mission from God. ~ Elwood,