Front page | perl.perl6.language |
Postings from May 2001
Eric Roode writes: : >And the fact is, I've always loathed qw(), despite the fact that I : >invented it myself. :-) : > -- Larry Wall in <199911021845.KAA01167@kiev.wall.org> : : : Well, one person's ugly is another person's joy forever. : : Regardless of the aesthetics of q//, qq//, qw//, et al, (and here : docs too), they get the job done in a remarkably flexible, efficient : way that is simply not possible with just about any other language : out there. : : 9 times out of 100, qw saves a large number of keystrokes. (The : other 1% of the time, you have to work around qw's inability to : quote things with spaces). : : qq, q, and here-docs may be "ugly", but that's a judgment call. What : they are not is "broken". : : Personally, I don't understand how using two alphabetic characters : and a pair of delimiters, in order to save typing a whole mess of : quotes and backslashes, can be construed as "ugly". :-) : : And, while I'm on my soapbox here, I don't get how <...> is a vast : improvement over qw<...>. :-) Please pardon my hyperbole. I don't loathe qw() so badly that I want to get rid of it. I merely want to put it in the same status as the other general quote operators that also have a non-general pair of standard quote characters. I would feel the same about qq// if there weren't a "". Larry