* Tim Smith fired off this tart reply:
> In article <1gmp9o59ydn3v$.1j59n98akh72i$.dlg@xxxxxxxxxx>,
> Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> http://avatraxiom.livejournal.com/58084.html
>>
>> "However, Perl would not be my first choice for writing or maintaining a
>> large project, such as Bugzilla. The same flexibility that makes Perl so
>> powerful makes it very difficult to enforce code quality standards or to
>> implement modern object-oriented designs."
>
> Perl is fine for modern object-oriented designs that are actually well
> designed. It is not so good for the kind of bloated, ridiculous,
> build-elaborate-class-heirarchies-where-simple-composition-will-do
> trainwrecks of design that current and former Java programmers tend to
> (and since Java is now the first language of many people, the mistakes
> they learn in Java tend to be brought to whatever other languages they
> learn).
>
> So, what we got with Java (or rather, with Java being poorly taught) was
> a generation of programmers who only knew bad design--and so that became
> part of their culture. They developed elaborate tools and methodologies
> to handle bad design. It's amazing.
>
> In many ways, Java has become the modern BASIC.
What does that make .NET and Intellisense? <Just kidding!>
Actually, now that Java is somewhat open, I'd be more keen to delve into
it.
--
Tux rox!
|
|