Another Comparison Of Programming Languages

Abigail abigail at
Thu Jul 11 15:34:01 BST 2013

On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 05:15:41PM +0200, Mallory van Achterberg wrote:
> Hey all,
> Hixie wrote up (or just posted from elsewhere) this
> This is going around the twitters. Wonder if some of the
> mistakes can be fixed.

Does it matter? In fact, one could say it probably portraits Perl better
then it really is. There will be many people, including hard core Perl
programmers, that Perl's eval/die doesn't classify as "exceptions". And
I wouldn't say Perl has "class references", unless you call a string
containing the name of a package as a "class reference". Perl has native
Unicode support? Only if you kick it really, really hard, turn a blind
eye, and make sure you never end up with non-ASCII characters in non-UTF8
strings (and we never did reach concensus on how to deal with folding
issues, did we?)

But I grant the author that many things are subject to opinion, and
definitions may be streched. As such, they seem to be strechted in
Perls favour.

The only Perl item I think is really wrong is the Garbage collection entry
on "Automatic memory management". That should be "Reference counting".
I don't know enough about C++ whether that falls in the same category as
"Lexically Scoped".


More information about the mailing list