Another Comparison Of Programming Languages

[Abigail]

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
> http://ian.hixie.ch/programming/
> 
> 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".





Abigail