From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <00c501c04980$d6e8dac0$0ab9c6d4@cybercable.fr>
From: "Boyd Roberts" <boyd@planete.net>
To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
References: <1971527636@snellwilcox.com>, <01a201c048ec$a706db20$0ab9c6d4@cybercable.fr> <973640592.223769@eeyore.dstc.edu.au>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: Perl5 & kenji arisawa's perl question
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Wed,  8 Nov 2000 13:38:47 +0100
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 23e45a58-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

From: George Michaelson <ggm@dstc.edu.au>

> boyd@planete.net (Boyd Roberts) writes:
>
> >gotta be a better idea than the perl port :-)
> 
> but would you of neccessity say the same thing of a python port? or
> a tcl port? seems like it might be better to be explicit about
> criticizing a language, not the idea of porting language(s) per se.
> 

i'm criticising the language, not languages.  perl is an abortion;
it is unreadable, the grammar is ghastly and it violates the 'tools'
approach.

i understand why sysadmins like it.  i just won't use it,
although i have bug-fixed it.

i would also object to csh, sendmail, vi, *rn, readnews, X
and various other pieces of unix trash being ported to plan 9.
it's plan 9, if you want unix, you know where to find it.