[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/12/22]
It was thus said that the Great Anton Berezin once stated:
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 02:43:08AM -0500, Sean Conner wrote:
>
> > Um ... <raises hand> ... I'd like somethimg a bit more consistent.
> >
> > A typical programic idiom I use (when programming in C) is:
> >
> > if (argc == 1)
> > do_some_process(stdin);
> > else
> > {
> > for (i = 1 ; i < argc ; i++)
> > {
> > input = fopen(argv[i],"r");
> > do_some_process(input);
> > fclose(input);
> > }
> > }
> >
> > So imagine my surprise when:
> >
> > if (scalar(@ARGV) == 1)
> > { # the one bit of consistancy I can do without actually
> > &do_some_process(STDIN);
> > }
> > else
> > {
> > for ($i = 1 ; $i < scalar(@ARGV) ; $i++)
> > {
> > open INPUT,$ARGV[i];
> > &do_some_process(INPUT);
> > close INPUT;
> > }
> > }
>
> Now, this is just silly. This reminds me of someone complaining that Perl
> sucks because Perl code is difficult to read by C programmers. Perl is
> hateful, but not for these reasons. You are just trying to write C here.
Um ...
Unix is written in C. Perl came to life in the Unix universe. Plenty of
Unix utilities like cat, sed, od, grep and less (and more) can be used on
files or in pipes. This idiom is pretty strong in the Unix world. Perl
seems to go out of its way to prevent this (or is that me as a C programmer
speaking?)
-spc (then again, it took a year or two for me to stop writing assembly
language in C ... 8-)
There's stuff above here
Generated at 14:01 on 28 Dec 2006 by mariachi 0.52