In article <············@nntp2.ba.best.com>, Xah <···@best.com> wrote:
>After getting to know Perl, I think Perl puts computer science in shame. My
>question is: What are the alternative languages for text manipulation?
>
>I'm posting this question here because I am interested in opinions or
>answers from the lisp community. (as opposed to the common imperative
>languages crowd)
I think that Python has a nice mix of procedural/functional/oop features,
a simple, readable syntax, a good, free, open implementation and a
supportive user community.
Paul Prescod
In article <············@nntp2.ba.best.com>, Xah <···@best.com> wrote:
>After getting to know Perl, I think Perl puts computer science in shame. My
>question is: What are the alternative languages for text manipulation?
>
>I'm posting this question here because I am interested in opinions or
>answers from the lisp community. (as opposed to the common imperative
>languages crowd)
"No, I am not going to explain it. If you can't figure it out, you
didn't want to know anyway..." -- Larry Wall, 1991
Which, of course, means that if you can't read line noise and make
sense of it, Perl isn't for you. Personally, I like Perl a lot, despite
it's whorelike qualities of trying to please everyone all the time,
but most of my friends who hate Perl use either Python or Tcl for text
manipulation.
--
John Holder (·······@frii.com) http://www.frii.com/~jholder/
Sr. Programmer Analyst, J.D.Edwards World Source Company, Denver, CO
http://www.jdedwards.com/
> In article <············@nntp2.ba.best.com>, Xah <···@best.com> wrote:
> >After getting to know Perl, I think Perl puts computer science in shame. My
> >question is: What are the alternative languages for text manipulation?
Have you considered using Snobol?
--
Le Hibou (mo bheachd fhe/in: my own opinion)
"What the ... This is Lambic! Where's my culture of amoebic dysentery?"
-- Gary Larson
>>>>> "Donald" == Donald Fisk <···········@bt-sys.bt.spamblock.co.uk> writes:
>> In article <············@nntp2.ba.best.com>, Xah <···@best.com> wrote:
>> >After getting to know Perl, I think Perl puts computer science in shame. My
>> >question is: What are the alternative languages for text manipulation?
Donald> Have you considered using Snobol?
At one point before I stumbled onto Perl, I was pretty fluent in Icon,
developed by Ralph Griswold (one of the proponents of Snobol). (In
fact, some of my code remains in the Icon library to this day.) There
are times when I wish Perl had some more Icon-like qualities, but if
you're into pure text matching, go for it. Icon's biggest downside
for me is that it didn't have very many "outside world" interfaces,
whereas Perl excels at being a "glue" language. So when I choose
Perl, I'm sacrificing a hunk of neat text-mangler things in order to
really get work done. :-)
Just another guy who lists 57 languages on his resume, :-)
--
Name: Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095
Keywords: Perl training, UNIX[tm] consulting, video production, skiing, flying
Email: <······@stonehenge.com> Snail: (Call) PGP-Key: (finger ······@ora.com)
Web: <A HREF="http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/">My Home Page!</A>
Quote: "I'm telling you, if I could have five lines in my .sig, I would!" -- me
Randal Schwartz <······@stonehenge.com> writes:
> So when I choose Perl, I'm sacrificing a hunk of neat text-mangler
> things in order to really get work done. :-)
Hmm, I'll have to look at this Icon thing. Something that makes you
"sacrifice neat text-mangler things" when moving to Perl ought to be
quite good at text-mangling.
--
Hrvoje Niksic <·······@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
"Psychos _do not_ explode when sunlight hits them."