Re^2: Why Perl in 2020

"I do believe that Raku and Perl 7 will at some point combine."

No. Way. In. Hell. We've got 20 years of nonsense trying to separate the two. There is no way they will ever converge.

"People overuse Object Orientation (OO) in my opinion."

Would you mind sharing what your opinion actually is? I've got 54 (I think) CPAN distributions, and I'll bet less than 10% are non-OO. Most software in other languages I write in are OO as well. Typically, if I'm not writing low-level hardware interface software in C, I like OO (for the most part). What in your mind defines when OO is being overused?

"For Python, if you know and understand OO, then OO is fine."

Python, in-and-of itself, inherently is OO, right to its core. Whether you know and understand OO is irrelevant, because if you're using Python, you are by default using OO even if you don't want to ;)

Comment on Re^2: Why Perl in 2020

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Why Perl in 2020 by eyepopslikeamosquito (Archbishop) on Jan 06, 2021 at 07:18 UTC
Python, in-and-of itself, inherently is OO, right to its core Really? Care to elaborate? Note that Matz invented Ruby because he disapproved of Python's OO, as indicated here: I was talking with my colleague about the possibility of an object-oriented scripting language. I knew Perl (Perl4, not Perl5), but I didn't like it really, because it had the smell of a toy language (it still has). The object-oriented language seemed very promising. I knew Python then. But I didn't like it, because I didn't think it was a true object-oriented language – OO features appeared to be add-on to the language. As a language maniac and OO fan for 15 years, I really wanted a genuine object-oriented, easy-to-use scripting language. I looked for but couldn't find one. So I decided to make it. Matsumoto describes the design of Ruby as being like a simple Lisp language at its core, with an object system like that of Smalltalk, blocks inspired by higher-order functions, and practical utility like that of Perl. See also: old stack overflow discussion of Python OO	[reply]
Re^4: Why Perl in 2020 by Arunbear (Prior) on Jan 06, 2021 at 14:58 UTC
His claim is correct in the sense that in Python, everything is an object (see an example). Ironically those objects are hidden behind a procedural skin, no doubt because Python was procedural before OOP was bolted on, and they couldn't have two ways to do the same thing :)	[reply]
Re^5: Why Perl in 2020 by LanX (Saint) on Jan 07, 2021 at 13:25 UTC
Are you sure this isn't just an example of autoboxing of primitives like in JavaScript without explicit `String` class as wrapper for primitive `string` type ...etc? ° Perl can/could do the same see `autobox` Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery} °) see https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Primitive	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^6: Why Perl in 2020 by Arunbear (Prior) on Jan 07, 2021 at 16:51 UTC
Re^7: Why Perl in 2020 by LanX (Saint) on Jan 07, 2021 at 17:17 UTC
Re^5: Why Perl in 2020 by stevieb (Canon) on Jan 06, 2021 at 15:52 UTC
It would have been prudent of me to have worded it as you have, and that is exactly what I meant... in Python, everything is an object.	[reply]