in reply to Re: don't { use Perl }
in thread don't { use Perl }

I don't think that Erik's point was that using just one language made him narrow minded. His main problem is not able to figure out in which domain a problem lies. Knowing more languages than just Perl doesn't solve the problem of determining whether a solution needs to be searched in the language, the protocol, the system, the hardware or something else.

It's good to broaden your horizon, but I don't give to much weigth to knowing lots of languages. Small domain languages can be useful, but the added value of knowing more general purpose languages rapidly decreases IMO.

Abigail

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: don't { use Perl }
by hsmyers (Canon) on Jun 10, 2002 at 13:07 UTC
    When I read your remark:
    It's good to broaden your horizon, but I don't give to much weigth to knowing lots of languages. Small domain languages can be useful, but the added value of knowing more general purpose languages rapidly decreases IMO
    I immediately thought of Claude Levi-Strauss' remark "Language conditions thought." and wondered if you would agree or not?

    –hsm

    "Never try to teach a pig to sing…it wastes your time and it annoys the pig."
[reply]
      I immediately thought of Claude Levi-Strauss' remark "Language conditions thought." and wondered if you would agree or not?
      Didn't his brother or cousin go into genetic research? I mean, as a kid, growing up, I was always hearing something about "Levi-Strauss Genes".

      -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

[reply]
        That's twisted<g>!

        –hsm

        "Never try to teach a pig to sing…it wastes your time and it annoys the pig."
[reply]
      Since I don't know that remark, let alone its context, I've no opinion about it.

      Abigail

[reply]
        Well since I can't lay my hands on the context (and must admit to the possibility that it was Noam Chomsky and not Levi-Strauss) I'll have to make do with yet another quote:"Language shapes the way we think, and determines what we can think about." by Benjamin Lee Whorf. Which I've always applied to computer languages even though both (I think) were intended to describe what linguists would call 'real' language. To hack the words of my betters, while language may express the solution, it limits the solution set as well. This leads me to suggest some value in knowing more than one language. Hence my curiosity over your view(s).

        –hsm

        "Never try to teach a pig to sing…it wastes your time and it annoys the pig."
[reply]

In Section Meditations