on the edge
computers & technology, books & writing, civilisation & society, cars & stuff
If you’re not living life on the edge, you’re taking up too much space.
Amnesty International Australia — global defenders of human rights
Médecins Sans Frontières — help us save lives around the world
Electronic Frontiers Australia — protecting and promoting on-line civil liberties in Australia
(Coming soon )
(Coming soon )
(Coming soon )
Mon, 07 Mar 2005
As a longstanding member, I generally read the
The February 2005 issue contains an article entitled Error Handling Patterns in Perl, which I thought might be interesting. Although I don’t use Perl myself (for reasons that I have frequently enumerated and won’t repeat here), I’m quite happy to read about good programming practices, regardless of the language chosen for exposition, because ideas usually translate to other languages as well.
If one were to write an article that was intended to show the superiority of one language over another, it would make sense to provide examples in both the languages—unless one was Bjarne Stroustrup writing one of his silly things purporting to show the superiority of C++ over C. But, where the objective is to demonstrate good practice in one language, it would be wise to restrict oneself to examples in that language rather than illustrating one’s lack of knowledge of other languages.
In what follows, I’m going to assume the Perl is correct on the basis that the author claims to know Perl, but the correctness of the Perl has no impact on what I’m about to say.
To get things started, the author gives an example of what he thinks is the C idiom for opening a file (slightly cleaned up to avoid confusing the issue with extraneous material):
FILE *fp; fp = fopen("/my/file", "r"); if (fp == NULL) return -1;
Then he explains that you can do the same thing, using the same idiom, in Perl. The example code is obvious, so I won’t repeat it here. Then he explains why a simpler idiom might be useful and he gives the following Perl code as an illustration of a better way to do it:
open(my $fh "/my/file") or die "Cannot open '/my/file'\n";
Fair enough. But it’s just silly to try to make that look better than the C code when anybody who is capable of getting a job as a C programmer would have used the real C idiom below:
if ((fp = fopen("/my/file", "r")) == NULL) err(1, "cannot open '/my/file'");
Clearly, that is identical to the Perl example. Why make a fuss about this? Had the point been “don’t do it the way we showed in the first Perl example,” that would have made some kind of sense. But the real point was obscured by the silly pretence of showing something that purported to be better then the C way, making this a choice of language issue rather than simple good practice independent of language.
Perhaps it doesn’t really matter all that much, but I find it difficult to take seriously somebody who takes the time to give example code in a language he doesn’t use without making the slightest effort to discover if what he’s saying is plain silly. And that makes me doubtful about the value of the rest of his paper—which might just have some good stuff in it.
As it happens, I did read the rest of the paper because I still had coffee in my cup. That’s when I came across some of the real reasons why I hate Perl (and provided my title for this rant). There really are too many ways to do things, and some of them affect you even if you don’t specifically choose to use them, being built in to the language. Nobody is forced to use C’s ternary operator, and many people just don’t use it. Everybody who uses C understands the concepts of true and false as expressed in the language. But Perl has so many ways of “helping” you that it also has a million ways of expressing false, some of which work all the time and some of which don’t. How silly is that?