From: Chad Perrin <code@...>
Date: 2010-08-24T00:10:48+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby Code Parsing

--qlTNgmc+xy1dBmNv
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 04:20:54PM +0900, Ryan Davis wrote:
> On Aug 22, 2010, at 20:12 , Chad Perrin wrote:
> >=20
> > On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 08:38:40AM +0900, Caleb Clausen wrote:
> >>=20
> >> Ruby is designed to be easy for humans to read, which means it is not
> >> easy for computers to parse. As opposed to say, perl, which is hard
> >> for both humans and computers to parse. If you were to write down in
> >> one email a complete set of rules, it would be a pretty long email.
> >=20
> > I find Perl pretty easy to parse.  Maybe yours is a personal problem.
>=20
> No, you do not find perl pretty easy to parse. Last time I checked, you
> can NOT statically parse perl. You have to evaluate it in order to get
> a proper parse. So, you find it pretty easy to evaluate. No easy task
> for me, I'll admit, but there is no reason for you to be an ass about
> it.=20

Regardless of nitpicky phrasing, I found your comment about Perl kind of
ass-ish.  It seems kind of ironic to be called an ass for pointing out
that your problems with Perl may not be others' problems, when you make a
categorical deprecating statement about Perl.

--=20
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]

--qlTNgmc+xy1dBmNv
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAkxyjtgACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKXb1gCgrqIko1jUkiXROVgeG/37fE2e
vBIAnRg9ZxZGjAMG/XsUxdAy/oIpeJK7
=p/uw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--qlTNgmc+xy1dBmNv--