Re: ::scr shell 'programming' considered harmful

[Greg McCarroll <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

* David Cantrell (david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> >From the latest RISKS digest (issue 21.80):
> 

excellent source

> > The root cause and the real source of the risk here is the attempt to use an
> > interactive command language as a programming language.

to broaden out this argument, might i suggest that languages can be
mapped upon a sliding scale of formality and structure, that is not
always equivalent to the traditional high level/medium level/low level
groupings, for instance .....

Bash - Perl - Python - C - Pascal - Java - C# - C++ - SmallTalk - ML

is one range of languages[2], with languages to the right being more and
more `rigorous'[1]

however the more you go to the left the faster it is to develop useful
applications[3] in the langauge in question

the whole trick is choosing the right point on the scale, increasingly
I see the right point being Python for the sort of applications I
write, although I do believe you can create a Perl subset that gets an
equivalent level of formality, the TMTWTDI brigade pull it to the
left. 

Greg

[1] for my definition of regiourous in this context
[2] that i have just chosen at random
[3] at least for the applications i develop

-- 
Greg McCarroll                                 http://217.34.97.146/~gem/