 | | Re: Perl rules! —Larry Pieniazek
| | | | Good post! (...) I agree with most all you say, but I am surprised that you consider this: in-memory compilation of arbitrary code constructed on-the-fly, necessary for a language to be "high level". I rather consider it a potential pitfall for the (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jun-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Perl rules! —Todd Lehman
| | | | | (...) I didn't mean to say that it was necessary for a language to be "high level" but it certainly is a common property of high-level langauges (for example Lisp/Scheme, Logo, PostScript*, and Perl). (...) It certainly has a variety of mis-uses, (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jun-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Perl rules! —Frank Filz
| | | | | Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) functions, (...) regular (...) level" (...) I've always had a sport in my heart for SNOBOL which had an eval function to evaluate an expression, and a compile function if you needed real code. I used the (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jun-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | | |
