Re^2: the sad reality of perl

in reply to Re: the sad reality of perl
in thread the sad reality of perl

> Who answers a question about Perl with Python?

Someone like John D. Cook, a "Scientific Python" consultant, who trolls Perl6 feeds with unsolicited advice about his favorite snake-oil:

twitter.com/zoffix/status/1040354046744449025

Comment on Re^2: the sad reality of perl

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: the sad reality of perl by 1nickt (Canon) on Oct 14, 2018 at 18:14 UTC
Haha, battle of the snake-oil salesmen! Your pythonista trolling a "Perl6ista" selling the fact that you can write 2²³ in the source code in his language. Because that's so much easier than writing 2*23 ... (In fact, the closest I can get in `vim 8` is 2^{2 3}, with: "2 Ctl-K 2 S Ctl-K 3 S" because "Ctl-K 23" is interpreted as 2/3...) The way forward always starts with a minimal test.*	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: the sad reality of... typing unicode by Anonymous Monk on Oct 15, 2018 at 02:21 UTC
(In fact, the closest I can get in vim 8 is 2^{2 3}, with: "2 Ctl-K 2 S Ctl-K 3 S" because "Ctl-K 23" is interpreted as 2/3...) Check out OSX (have to enable unicode source first): 2Іі = control + space, 2, option + 0 + 0 + b + 2, option + 0 + 0 + b + 3.	[reply]

In Section Meditations