Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!willett!dwp
From: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us (Doug Philips)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: What does an anti-perl look like
Message-ID: <2901.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 18 Jun 91 14:30:13 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.
Lines: 28

In article <2154@sheol.UUCP>, throopw@sheol.UUCP (Wayne Throop) writes:

+                                                         Perl simply
+makes this palatable to the Unix community by leaving out some of the
+parenthesis and including a baroque syntax and idiosyncratic semantics.  :-)

:-) :-)

+As an aside, I also find it interesting that "everybody" seems to have
+implemented or be implementing a tiny language or two, even if they
+later repent.  I don't know if that's good, bad, or indifferent, 
+but it seems to be so. 

Perhaps because "everybody" has read Jon Bentley's Programming Pearls
column on Little Languages?

+As I said, I myself have a fine travois which I use daily.  I don't
+regret inventing it, and I learned a lot from it, and it is a fine and
+dandy tool... but my original justification for writing it was, in
+retrospect, insufficient.

I think that one of the important benefits of writing/implementing your
own LL in addition to accomplishing the immediate task at hand, is in
the learning experience.

-Doug
---
Preferred:  dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us	Ok:  {pitt,sei,uunet}!willett!dwp