From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: reference parameter Date: 1999/10/22 Message-ID: <3149602104496660@naggum.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 539334172 References: <380d6fbd@news.vtc.ru> <380F6B74.DFD98A37@ncgr.org> <38109318.E2E698A5@ncgr.org> mail-copies-to: never X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 940613305 3552 195.0.192.66 (22 Oct 1999 17:28:25 GMT) Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879; +1 510 435 8604; http://www.naggum.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 22 Oct 1999 17:28:25 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp * David Hanley | I think one of the reasons perl has succeeded while lisp has not is | because perl gurus respond with "how do I" questions with "here's how" | instead of pontificating on what they consider good programming practices. when trying to tell people about better ways is considered wrong and teachers are castigated for their attempts to illuminate, you have a world where stuff like Perl will succeed beyond your wildest dreams. so you confuse cause and effect. Perl is a language _designed_ to have "do this"-type answers to every question. the consequence is that there is no good programming practice in Perl to pontificate about, and people just learn to do in Perl whatever they already think is OK. (if it was not doable that way, Perl was modified so it would be.) Perl is a cheap whore of a language for equally indiscriminate people. some consider this a very positive property and call it "popularity"; others don't. personally, I would rather see pontifications about good programming practice than bad, which is what Perl aficionados and defenders do. #:Erik