|Keep It Simple, Stupid|
Is Programming Perl still relevant as a reference book?by vrk (Chaplain)
|on Mar 02, 2007 at 17:40 UTC||Need Help??|
vrk has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:
I have recently found new zeal in discovering what is left to discover on my personal journey towards Perl Enlightenment. I have been programming in Perl for a full seven years now, albeit I have made several excursions to other languages. Last year was first spent in the sweaty jungle of C++, then the Monad City of Haskell, and lastly on the austere and barren plains of Lisp. The year before that saw me travelling the fine line between Perl and C, laced with short vacations in the nearby forest of Tcl.
It is truly a modern miracle that I have survived this far unaided by the holy scripture, The Camel Book; I have never read it nor owned a copy. I am currently burning with a desire to learn the intricate details of every construct in the language, every detail in the syntax. The man pages are there, yes, as is PerlMonks, but these sources are electronic only. I need a concrete, paper book which I can browse at leisure.
My question is now, is The Camel Book still relevant as a reference book? The third edition is soon seven years old, and Perl is a moving target. Which version of the language does it refer to? What has changed? How will I know which parts have?
Should I wait for the fourth edition, which supposedly covers Perl 6?
The book is appealing for its price as well, for I have been low in funds for two years. Higher Order Perl is another very appealing book, but it must wait at the bookstore until the finances allow its acquirement. Not only that, but I am familiar with the many functional programming idioms it describes. What I seek now is deep knowledge in the language itself.
Thank you for your patience.