zlacker

>>todsac+(OP)
I spent year developing CMS in Perl in 1999 (HTA application with ActivePerl. wonder if anybody else did something like this). It traumatized me, and first thing that I did in my next job is to learn python and develop some core systems in it. Few of my friends moved from perl to python as well.

I still remember spending time with my coworkers on bench outside of building trying to figure out #@$%$^&$%@something = []sd[dsd]@$#!&lala lines written by previous developers

>>tguvot+X3
Perl heads are downvoting you but I agree as a longtime ex Perl user that the sigils were noisy nonsense.

The original intent was you could see var types with them - $scalar, @array, %hash.

They immediately broke this by deciding the sigil would apply to the value /extracted/ from the data structure. So you declared array @foo but accessed an element as $foo[1]. What? There’s a logic there but already you’re violating many people’s expectations so why even have them. The sigils are now confusing many people instead of clarifying anything.

The sigil idea then /completely/ failed when they introduced references and “complex data structures” (nesting arrays within arrays like every other language - in Perl this was a special thing because they had been flattening lists by default so no way to put one inside another).

So now to get at a hash in a hash you used not % but $ since a reference is a scalar. $hash1->$hash2->{“key”}. Versus $hash3{“key”} for a simple hash. Just awful noisy syntax. Due to poor language design up front.

>>educti+a8
Before that job in perl i wrote asm/tcl/delphi/c/php (and bunch of other languages after).

This perl syntax caused some kind of rejection on almost physical level. It was same for many of my friends. "Zen of python" was a breath of fresh air.