Larry Wall's comments on Ruby

Drew Mills points out:

>OO is still not taught as the norm.
>So Larry was correct.  That's not to say that the world needs to accede to
>this pedagogy, but it is a positive thing to recognize reality, even if you
>decide not to change.

I think that’s a fair summary of Perl, actually. It’s a very
reasonable thing to conform to the norms – all possible norms, in
Perl’s case. All progress, of course, depends on the unreasonable
person :slight_smile:

But this is all beside the point – Larry’s off the mark
in suggesting that an inconsistency is preferable for any reason. I
contend that that attitude is just plain wrong. It’s better to
be consistent – even if that consistency is towards something
new and unfamiliar – than to introduce exceptional cases that
the user (at any level) has to carry around.

/\ndy

But this is all beside the point – Larry’s off the mark
in suggesting that an inconsistency is preferable for any reason. I
contend that that attitude is just plain wrong. It’s better to
be consistent – even if that consistency is towards something
new and unfamiliar – than to introduce exceptional cases that
the user (at any level) has to carry around.

I agree here too in this context, but I have to put in a quote I’m
rather fond of…

Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative. – Oscar Wilde

=)

···

=====

Use your computer to help find a cure for cancer: http://members.ud.com/projects/cancer/

Yahoo IM: michael_s_campbell


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes

Andrew Hunt wrote:

But this is all beside the point – Larry’s off the mark
in suggesting that an inconsistency is preferable for any reason. I
contend that that attitude is just plain wrong. It’s better to
be consistent – even if that consistency is towards something
new and unfamiliar – than to introduce exceptional cases that
the user (at any level) has to carry around.

And you know what, in many ways consistency is exactly what Larry is
doing. If you’ve been
following the Apocalypses, you should have noticed by now how hard he is
working towards
cleaning up the syntax of Perl operators and Regex’s. Making them
"more consistent", or
something to that effect.

So, in some ways Larry just said you shouldn’t necessarily strive to do
exactly what he is
doing! You have to forgive him though, he’s a busy man and has a lot on
his plate.
Everybody slips up once in awhile, some just get more publicity when
they do.

Whatever the case may be, Perl 6 is going to be on interesting beasty,
regardless of what
Larry says about Ruby.

Bryan

But this is all beside the point – Larry’s off the mark
in suggesting that an inconsistency is preferable for any reason. I
contend that that attitude is just plain wrong. It’s better to
be consistent – even if that consistency is towards something
new and unfamiliar – than to introduce exceptional cases that
the user (at any level) has to carry around.

I agree here too in this context, but I have to put in a quote I’m
rather fond of…

Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative. – Oscar Wilde

Haha. I was waiting for that quote to rear it’s ugly head. :slight_smile:

···

=)

=====

Use your computer to help find a cure for cancer: http://members.ud.com/projects/cancer/

Yahoo IM: michael_s_campbell


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com


Paul Duncan pabs@pablotron.org pabs in #gah (OPN IRC)
http://www.pablotron.org/ OpenPGP Key ID: 0x82C29562

I’d challenge Mr Wilde to be willing to write that with a pen that
distorted letters depending on its location on the paper, its angle to
the ground, and the weather condition in Timbuctu.

(Not at all off topic.)

Massimiliano

···

On Sat, Sep 07, 2002 at 05:09:37AM +0900, Michael Campbell wrote:

I agree here too in this context, but I have to put in a quote I’m
rather fond of…

Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative. – Oscar Wilde

Having read some of Mr. Wilde’s works, I’m not convinced he didn’t do just that.
=)

···

On Sat, Sep 07, 2002 at 05:09:37AM +0900, Michael Campbell wrote:

I agree here too in this context, but I have to put in a quote I’m
rather fond of…

Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative. – Oscar Wilde

I’d challenge Mr Wilde to be willing to write that with a pen that
distorted letters depending on its location on the paper, its angle to
the ground, and the weather condition in Timbuctu.

(Not at all off topic.)

In article NFBBKBEMGLGCIPPFGHOLKELGCKAA.michael_s_campbell@yahoo.com,

···

Mike Campbell michael_s_campbell@yahoo.com wrote:

On Sat, Sep 07, 2002 at 05:09:37AM +0900, Michael Campbell wrote:

I agree here too in this context, but I have to put in a quote I’m
rather fond of…

Consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative. – Oscar Wilde

I’d challenge Mr Wilde to be willing to write that with a pen that
distorted letters depending on its location on the paper, its angle to
the ground, and the weather condition in Timbuctu.

(Not at all off topic.)

Having read some of Mr. Wilde’s works, I’m not convinced he didn’t do just that.
=)

Yes, while it seems to be a fitting quote and it’s often thrown around,
I don’t think you’d really want to rely on Oscar Wilde to give you tips
about programming (or programming language design) :wink:

Phil

Yes, while it seems to be a fitting quote and it’s often thrown
around,
I don’t think you’d really want to rely on Oscar Wilde to give you
tips
about programming (or programming language design) :wink:

Of course not, everything has its place. In my day-to-day work (I’m
an application programmer by trade), I hear time over time that
people want to do “x” because it’s consistent with “y”; never mind
that “x” is wrong, inefficient, or otherwise “smelly”.

I’m actually probably much more conservative in that regard than some
of my coworkers in that regard, but I’m not afraid to try something
different if “the old way” doesn’t seem to apply. In that regard,
Wilde was right.

To add another quote to the mix (and I apologize for not having a
cite; I’m going from memory); “there are 2 types of fools in the
world; one says “this is old and therefore good”, the other says
"this is new, and therefore better”". I’m often trying to figure out
which fool I’m trying to be less of at that moment.

···

=====

Use your computer to help find a cure for cancer: http://members.ud.com/projects/cancer/

Yahoo IM: michael_s_campbell


Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes

Of course not, everything has its place. In my day-to-day work (I’m
an application programmer by trade), I hear time over time that
people want to do “x” because it’s consistent with “y”; never mind
that “x” is wrong, inefficient, or otherwise “smelly”.

We’re talking about different kinds of consistency. In fact, you’re
inducing the question this thread would have benefitted a lot from the
beginning:

Consistent with what?

Ruby strives for internal consistency, i.e. parts of the whole that
stay consistent with one another. One could try to define it in
abstract and logical terms but Matz has defined it best in terms of
the effect: once you master it, you feel comfortable with it.

I guess too many pick up an objectionable (to put it mildly) reference
when cheking for consistency. C programmers are used to it, so we should stay consistent with it.''The rest of industry uses Java,
so we should stay consistent with it.’’ Or, as your coworkers
apparently would sat, ``Somebody did it this way, so we should stay
consistent with it.’’

It seems to me that the latter consistency is just a mask put on by
the fear of the new. And I’ve never in my life seen choices based on
fear that wouldn’t backfire. Timebombs, as someone else in this
thread sharply put it.

To add another quote to the mix (and I apologize for not having a
cite; I’m going from memory); “there are 2 types of fools in the
world; one says “this is old and therefore good”, the other says
"this is new, and therefore better”". I’m often trying to figure out
which fool I’m trying to be less of at that moment.

I strive to be the one that says ``this is new, and therefore try
it.’’ You’d be amazed at how much more of a fool is this deemed by
both those two types. :slight_smile:

Massimiliano

···

On Sun, Sep 08, 2002 at 08:38:29AM +0900, Michael Campbell wrote: