Re: Re: Types in Mathematica
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg62879] Re: [mg62805] Re: Types in Mathematica
- From: Ed Peschko <esp5 at pge.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 23:12:23 -0500 (EST)
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <200511200950.EAA04496@smc.vnet.net> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <200512032352.SAA15917@smc.vnet.net> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <200512051841.NAA21160@smc.vnet.net>
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 01:41:14PM -0500, Paul Abbott wrote:
> In article <dmui9j$ml5$1 at smc.vnet.net>,
> Sseziwa Mukasa <mukasa at jeol.com> wrote:
> > The ever contrarian Larry Wall of course decided that Perl, the
> > sin qua non of weak typing, would attempt to resolve that ambiguity.
> > The low regard with which Perl programmers are generally held in the
> > Computer Science community, a special circle of hell previously reserved
> > for Visual Basic users, is a by product of that fact.
That 'special circle of hell' that you speak of is news to me. I've never
heard of it; I know that perl has its detractors, but for every detractor, there's
a fervent supporter on communities like slashdot (http://www.slashdot.org) and
As for an impression of mathematica users, I've never seen one (positive or negative).
Mathematica seems to be off this particular map.
As for weak typing, its not necessarily a bad thing - its a damn *productive* thing
in the case of perl. That being said, optional, strong(er) typing wouldn't be that
bad an item to have. Perl6 is adding this, but its a long, slow slog; perl6 isn't expected
to be out for a couple of years, at the minimum.
Prev by Date:
Re: Types in Mathematica thread
Next by Date:
Re: Re: Types in Mathematica thread
Previous by thread:
Re: Types in Mathematica
Next by thread:
Re: Re: Re: Types in Mathematica