Re^2: Why Perl Is Not My Favourite Functional Programming Language

How would prototypes help? All that does is allow for some syntactic sugar. It doesn't deal with the problems FoxtrotUniform mentioned. In addition, Perl5 doesn't really have solid support for lists, and arrays are not lists. Perl6 will deal with it better, by allowing you to pass lists to a function, but Perl5 requires you to deal with array references, which is just another hack.

Being right, does not endow the right to be rude; politeness costs nothing.
Being unknowing, is not the same as being stupid.
Expressing a contrary opinion, whether to the individual or the group, is more often a sign of deeper thought than of cantankerous belligerence.
Do not mistake your goals as the only goals; your opinion as the only opinion; your confidence as correctness. Saying you know better is not the same as explaining you know better.

Comment on Re^2: Why Perl Is Not My Favourite Functional Programming Language

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Why Perl Is Not My Favourite Functional Programming Language by itub (Priest) on Nov 06, 2004 at 03:54 UTC
I was refering to the idea that prototypes allow you to imitate the way builtins such as `grep` and `map` are called (without having to say "sub", but now I'm not so sure if it that was the issue).	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Why Perl Is Not My Favourite Functional Programming Language by FoxtrotUniform (Prior) on Nov 07, 2004 at 02:24 UTC
It wasn't. I just noticed that my original node was a bit vague about why I didn't like the builtin/user function distinction; I've updated it. Sorry about the confusion. `--` Yours in pedantry,`F o x t r o t U n i f o r m` "Anything you put in comments is not tested and easily goes out of date." -- tye	[reply]