Re^4: RFC: Should join subsume reduce?

The cow is called "List::Util". People seem to like it. People often look for things like min and max, which are reduce-based functions. I'm sorry you find such things pointless and abstract. Perhaps you will one day find a language crippled enough that people can't write bad code in it, and then you will be happy. However, that language will not be Perl. Perl is full of things that do different things in different contexts, and its development trend is to give programmers more power, not to confine them.

The problem you are dealing with is bad programmers, not Perl.

Caution: Contents may have been coded under pressure.

Comment on Re^4: RFC: Should join subsume reduce?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: RFC: Should join subsume reduce? by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Feb 22, 2006 at 01:58 UTC
No, that is not the trend. A lot of things that perform multiple duties in Perl 5 will receive separate names in Perl 6 (the two forms of `for`, the two functions called select, and many other things besides). I don’t see any reason to go counter to this trend by conflating join and reduce. List::Util has been in core for a while so is more likely to be available than this proposed extension of join, and “join” is a bad name for a reduce function anyway. Makeshifts last the longest.	[reply]
Re^5: RFC: Should join subsume reduce? by Anonymous Monk on Feb 21, 2006 at 22:46 UTC
The problem you are dealing with is bad programmers, not Perl. Well, that and I'm not allowed to use a sledgehammer in creative ways. ;-)	[reply]