Re^4: Why isn't there a "copy" function?

I don't want a lot of this stuff in the core simply because I'd like the core to be as minimilistic as possible (for one thing, it would encourage new programmers to use modules). It's too late for Perl5, but I can dream, can't I? Well, there's always Python, where you can't do a lot without including at least one module. And then there's C where you can't even do I/O without the help of a library. I love a language where I don't have to remember in which module which function was defined so I can use.

As for your reason, "to encourage new programmers to use modules", most people are interested in getting more people to program Perl by making it easier for new programmers. It seems you have a different view.

Comment on Re^4: Why isn't there a "copy" function?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Why isn't there a "copy" function? by hardburn (Abbot) on Sep 10, 2004 at 13:58 UTC
Well, there's always Python, where you can't do a lot without including at least one module. And then there's C where you can't even do I/O without the help of a library. I don't think it's that awful. It's one line of code per library. Besides, operations like copy and rename aren't that common in Perl. . . . most people are interested in getting more people to program Perl by making it easier for new programmers. Yes, I do have a different view. Perl has gone too far into wizard territory to be good for new programmers. I would never recommend Perl as a first language (Python and Ruby, OTOH, and great for this purpose). The same things that make it so great for experianced programmers are what make it so difficult for novices. "There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^5: Why isn't there a "copy" function?
by hardburn (Abbot) on Sep 10, 2004 at 13:58 UTC

Well, there's always Python, where you can't do a lot without including at least one module. And then there's C where you can't even do I/O without the help of a library.

I don't think it's that awful. It's one line of code per library. Besides, operations like copy and rename aren't that common in Perl.

. . . most people are interested in getting more people to program Perl by making it easier for new programmers.

Yes, I do have a different view. Perl has gone too far into wizard territory to be good for new programmers. I would never recommend Perl as a first language (Python and Ruby, OTOH, and great for this purpose). The same things that make it so great for experianced programmers are what make it so difficult for novices.

"There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.

[reply]