Re^12: The future of Perl?

Instead, I mean it to be "against the grain" as in the reverse of the "jenga tower".

I understood your drift, but I think that whilst it might make some sense to those in the know at the beginning, it would rapidly be lost over time and to those without knowledge of the history.

The are other reasons:

Perhaps primary amongst them is the problem of searching for terms that contain symbol characters.
Hence so many C++ sites/posts end up spelling it out: Cplusplus, which is just wrong.
Instead of post-modern perl we get post-decremented perl.
Is that better or worse than predecremented Perl.
Whilst I don't not like the 'a double negative is a positive' aspect; I think it would just be annoying over time.
A bit like Yahoo!'s pling that means they'll forever be the subject headlines like "Yahoo! Made! $8bn! In! One! Day! And! You'll! Easily! Guess! How!", "'Yahoo! Breaks! Every! Mailing! List! In! The! World!' says email guru", "Marissa! Mayer! ends! 21! month! dry! spell! as! Yahoo! sales! grow!", "Yahoo! finally! releases! Flickr! app! for! iPad! BUT! shuns! Windows! fans!"

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Comment on Re^12: The future of Perl?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^13: The future of Perl? by wjw (Priest) on Nov 12, 2014 at 13:29 UTC
Good points, one and all... Thanks ...the majority is always wrong, and always the last to know about it... Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results... A solution is nothing more than a clearly stated problem...otherwise, the problem is not a problem, it is simply an inconvenient fact wjw	[reply]