Kyle Rose <krose@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Miles Bader wrote: >> Of course, some of the most horrid unreadable source code I've ever seen >> is in one of git's competitors -- written in python.... > > Indeed. :-) > > At the office, people constantly badmouth Perl, which has some > admittedly evil syntax (especially around exception handling). Since Perl has agglomerated pretty much _every_ syntax, it is not surprising that evil syntax is included. > C++ is in the same category as Perl IMO: too easy to produce > unreadable code. Not quite. Perl gives you a hundred illegible ways to _say_ the same thing, C++ gives you a hundred illegible ways to _achieve_ the same thing, but using different means. > I like Ruby, except for the performance problems. Once they have > those worked out, Ruby will be "Perl done right." ;-) Ruby again is in the "throw every syntactical idiom I can think of together" ballpark. I find that a design mistake in Perl, a design mistake in Ruby, and even in C++ (Ada syntax for templates was just stupid, but at least there is no alternative syntax for it). That's one of the things I like about Lua: its syntax fits on one page in the reference manual. And the reference manual has a paper size of about A5. While the syntax for Lisp would probably fit in the margin, it does so at a cost in legibility. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
