Re: Comparing Perl with C#, a simple templating example

I've abused static to simplify the example, this might be considered poor style by C# afficionados or OO purists

That is a curious statement. Why is it considered poor style?

some have already grumbled about MS inventing another syntax instead of following the lead of Python, PHP, or PCRE

This is by far my biggest gripe, actually it's no longer a gripe, but rather an expected and regular annoyance. They even regularly *reinvent* their own syntax in cases where it is not necessary! It's like a game of "hide the ball" and they do it *yet again* with "Longhorn" (et al).

The 'hide the ball' phenomenon combined with the impracticality of CSharp (sidenote and gripe: 'CSharp' and 'dotNet' are better typographical keywords than the alternatives) as a 'script oriented programming' tool render it less attractive as a general-purpose tool to use every day, like perl. The IDE is nice though.

Nevertheless, nice writeup (was curious how EdwardG would follow up on this issue, as usual, very informative++)

Comment on Re: Comparing Perl with C#, a simple templating example

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Comparing Perl with C#, a simple templating example by EdwardG (Vicar) on Nov 24, 2004 at 13:26 UTC
Ironically the IDE (Visual Studio) is the thing I like the least about the whole dotNet bundle. To me it feels claustrophobic, especially when compared to the freedom, focus, and simplicity of a text editor like vim. Not to mention how it also seriously chokes on large solutions (.sln).	[reply]