Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 13:20:49 +0100 From: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: perl qstn... Message-ID: <20100406132049.641b9edf@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <20100406015544.GA21119@guilt.hydra> References: <4BB8108A.9080104@FreeBSD.org> <1270371713.5861.98.camel@tao.thought.org> <86aatjnsts.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <861vevnsow.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <j2ya14066a01004040945z39191770k2f025752317fb14a@mail.gmail.com> <20100404163353.GA15198@guilt.hydra> <20100404201442.b456044e.freebsd@edvax.de> <o2oa14066a01004041148zd4ef8167q32b04d58daec8f9f@mail.gmail.com> <4BB9A5ED.3040309@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20100405173632.739a0c42@gumby.homeunix.com> <20100406015544.GA21119@guilt.hydra>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 19:55:44 -0600 Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 05:36:32PM +0100, RW wrote: > > > > IMO this is a bad mistake that other languages were quite right not > > to copy - a test shouldn't come after a block of code unless it's > > evaluated after the block (as in repeat...until) > > There are more things in heav'n and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt > of by designers of eagerly evaluated prefix notation languages. And most of them are obscure for good reasons. Just because a a syntax fits into a classification scheme doesn't make it a good idea. Natural languages are mostly driven by spoken usage, in which people firm-up half-formed ideas as they speak - this is not a good model for programming languages. If you are hacking out a quick and dirty script it may be convenient to type the decision after the action, but it don't I think it promotes good quality software. Imperative languages have a natural order of decision followed by action, and code is most easily readable if the syntax doesn't try to subvert that.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100406132049.641b9edf>