Sorry, but that doesn't scan any better. It's one syllable over instead of one syllable under.

I laughed, I cried, I then replied.
Much better. :-)

Well... your version is a perfect iambic tetrameter, but I think the anapest at the end of 'and then I replied' gives a sense of playfulness and fits better with the rhythm of the words, yours is more...formal, don't you think?

But, yes, yours is technically superior - and I should have checked the scansion of my doggeral before critiquing someone else's! But, I must confess, I scan (and write) more by instinct and how something sounds to me... it has been interesting to see when that tendency is as asset (or not!) as I learn to code.

After more than 14 years of marriage to Yitzchak (ysth), I can finally do more than turn a computer on and off and use Microsoft Word! I've been amazed at how much artistry and beauty there can be in code... I had never thought of programming as potentially poetical.

Anyway, thank you for playing with me. :)

Eliana

"Formal" is in the mind of the reader... While it's the job of a good writer to covey his or her meaning to the reader, there's really no foolproof way of doing so, and that is especially true in the internet age, where things you write are being read around the world, by a host of different cultures. To my mind, your version (using proper modern grammar) was the more formal, while my version (using a more archaic manner of speech... "I then" is so rarely used anymore) sounded more playful to my ear.

As for "iambic tetrameter" and so forth, I stand in awe of your linguistic prowess. I can see why Perl appeals to you, being a programming language designed by a linguist. Thanks for sharing your story of "MS Word user to poetical programmer" :-)

--
Random Synapse Firing

d'I replied

--
In Bob We Trust, All Others Bring Data.