Piers Cawley wrote:
> be "If it's a word for a concept we don't
> actually have a word for, and it's not a complete and utter bastard to
> pronounce/spell then nick it."
s/not//;
s/nick/bastardize/;
:-)
--
John Porter
> "PC" == Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
PC> Remember, Britain hasn't been invaded or conquered since 1066. A
PC> remarkably large number of 'foreign' words have entered English
PC> since then. The rules seems to be "If it's a word for a concept we
PC> don't actually have a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> English, by comparison shows the effects of protracted foreign
> occupation of English speaking peoples by conquerors who spoke a
> foreign language.
And also of protacted occupation of foreign countries by English
speaking conquerors. Witness the number of Indian loa
> "Dan" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dan> Dunno--the older a language is, the more regular it seems to
Dan> be. (The rough edges get worn off, I assume) While Latin had a
Dan> reasonably complex set of rules, it was more regular than
Dan> English. Japanese feels the same, thoug
>Dunno--the older a language is, the more regular it
seems to be. (The rough
>edges get worn off, I assume) While Latin had a
reasonably complex set of
>rules, it was more regular than English. Japanese feels
the same, though
>I'll grant I've little enough experience with it that my
impress
At 10:43 PM 4/3/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 05:20:11PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Dunno--the older a language is, the more regular it seems to be. (The
> rough
> > edges get worn off, I assume) While Latin had a reasonably complex set of
> > rules, it was more reg
> In my experience of Japanese (and other languages) it's quite the opposite.
> Speakers get lazy. They cut corners. They omit things. They corrupt verb
> forms. Latin was pretty regular; languages derived from it aren't.
Simon doesn't know anything about Japanese, though. ;)
The evolution of la
On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 05:20:11PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Dunno--the older a language is, the more regular it seems to be. (The rough
> edges get worn off, I assume) While Latin had a reasonably complex set of
> rules, it was more regular than English. Japanese feels the same, though
> I'
At 12:00 PM 4/3/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Mon, Apr 02, 2001 at 09:12:00PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
> > In fact, I've come up with the same idea independently. Except I'd go a
> > bit further and claim that only a native English speaker could possibly
> > come up with the idea that ir
On Mon, Apr 02, 2001 at 09:12:00PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
> In fact, I've come up with the same idea independently. Except I'd go a
> bit further and claim that only a native English speaker could possibly
> come up with the idea that irregularity is useful.
I'd say that only a linguist
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Cozens) wrote on 26.03.01 in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Oh, and you think Perl is more English than German?
In fact, I've come up with the same idea independently. Except I'd go a
bit further and claim that only a native English speaker could possibly
come up with the
On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 11:08:14AM -0500, James Mastros wrote:
> Anyway, I'm trying to argue lingustics in a perl ML, with zero training.
That should be taken to mean that this thread is off topic, and should be
taken elsewhere. :)
> Is there a linguist in the house?
Oh, I guess so.
> (Hm, di
> Anyway, I'm trying to argue lingustics in a perl ML, with zero training.
> Is there a linguist in the house? (Hm, didn't Larry go to Japan to learn a
> language with wierd word-order?) (What's up with Larry, anyway? Any
> preliminary RFC responces?)
Everyone a linguist. :)
In any case, I th
At 06:53 AM 3/29/2001 +0200, Otto Wyss wrote:
>It seems you are not interested in critics, so lets end this thread.
More to the point, I said let it rest, so the thread should end. Now. And
this means *everyone*.
Thank you.
Dan
-
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 03:37:33PM -0700, Dan Brian wrote:
> > I must walk the god. (Subject modal-verb action-verb direct-object.)
> > A german-speaker would say:
> > I must the god walk. (Subject modal-verb direct-object action-verb.)
> "The god I must walk", "walk the god I must", etc. They are
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
:I'm choosing a new language only if is suitable for most of my tasks and
:these range from the 10 line script up to several million line project.
:Currently Perl is rather capable for any small scripting task but it's
:out of questions if there are more than 2 person in
Nicely put, Merijn.
Stomping into (any) programming language camp and telling loudly that
what you are doing is wrong is a bit like stomping into a Mongol camp
and asking what's up with the funny fur hats.
Or, in the of case Perl, accusing us of too much line noise and being
too hard to read, is
On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 06:53:49 +0200, Otto Wyss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > - Make readability your main objective. Readability is possibly the
> > weakest part of Perl.
> >
> > - Keep your eyes on modularity. Modularity is by far the best concept
> > where complexity could be hidden.
> >
>
> - Make readability your main objective. Readability is possibly the
> weakest part of Perl.
>
> - Keep your eyes on modularity. Modularity is by far the best concept
> where complexity could be hidden.
>
> - Don't forget usability. This is after all the point why people use
> Perl in the first
> Uh, have you followed this thread? It's nothing but another perlbashing
> session by a verbosity monger who can't handle $.
Well, you can bash him back in perl6, or continue the conversation on
advocacy. Up to you.
> Excuse me, but why would you send a perlbasher to the perl advocacy
> list. I
> OK, before this *completely* heads into the direction of advocacy,
which
> it's dangerous close to anyway, you need to qualify that.
Uh, have you followed this thread? It's nothing but another perlbashing
session by a verbosity monger who can't handle $.
I think Simon meant '[EMAIL PROTECTED]', but isn't interested enough to
correct himself. :)
On Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 11:33:18PM +0200, Otto Wyss wrote:
> Could you imaging being the leader of a 10 people project where
> everybody design and codes in their own unique manner?
No, which is why in *those* situations, you have house rules. I don't
think Perl stops you doing that. It just does
> Please CC Otto in all replies concerning this topic. I want to make sure he
> reads how wrong he is about Perl and its readability and I think Simon sums it
> up perfectly here.
>
Thank you very much for the CC and including Simon's message at the end.
> I also want to add that all of those s
On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, David Grove wrote:
-[chopped]-
> Python has its place, and I do support it and its growingly cocky users
> (not that they have much to be cocky about since they're the largest group
> of lamers this side of VB) and frankly it needs to stay there. Same thing
> for Java, REBOL,
-Original Message-
From: Jarkko Hietaniemi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 15.43
To: Brent Dax
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Perl culture, perl readabillity
>> The reward? English-speaking children learn what is arguably th
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 03:34:16PM -0800, Brent Dax wrote:
> The reward? English-speaking children learn what is arguably the most
> flexible and expressive spoken language in the world.
"Arguably"? I don't see how one could argue that, and I speak the damned
language. (I'm afraid I'm not going
> The reward? English-speaking children learn what is arguably the most
> flexible and expressive spoken language in the world.
Oh good hell.
> Yup. Remember, Larry Wall is a linguist by training--he learned in school
> about human languages. He applied this knowledge to Perl.
I wish I had
> >A study in Science (291
> >P.2165) found out that
> >english speaking children has
> >twice as much reading
> >problems as italian speaking
> >children of the same age.
> >And about similar difference
> >towards german and french.
> >This could come from the
> >fact that english has for 40
> >p
"David Grove" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Helton, Brandon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Please CC Otto in all replies concerning this topic. I want to make
> sure
> > he
> > reads how wrong he is about Perl and its readability and I think
Simon
> > sums it
> > up perfectly
"Helton, Brandon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please CC Otto in all replies concerning this topic. I want to make
sure
> he
> reads how wrong he is about Perl and its readability and I think Simon
> sums it
> up perfectly here.
Give the braindead no head, Brandon. I've recently come acr
Otto Wyss wrote on 3/26/01 5.41:
>A study in Science (291
>P.2165) found out that
>english speaking children has
>twice as much reading
>problems as italian speaking
>children of the same age.
>And about similar difference
>towards german and french.
>This could come from the
>fact that english h
> Hmm. I just relized what he's talking about. As an example, most nonsimple
> statements (IE past-tense, ones with modal and action verbs, etc) end in the
> verb. For example, an english-speaker would say:
> I must walk the god. (Subject modal-verb action-verb direct-object.)
> A german-speake
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 01:11:06PM -0700, Dan Brian wrote:
> As for the English influence, you're welcome to identify ways that the
> syntax could be extended or tightened to be less so. That's the intent of
> the mailing list. But please, no more Latin ... I like positional
> dependency. :)
Hmm.
1 10:03 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Perl culture, perl readabillity
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:34:41PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> - Make readability your main objective. Readability is possibly the
> weakest part of Perl.
There's nothing fundamentally about Perl that makes it u
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:34:41PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > - Make readability your main objective. Readability is possibly the
> > weakest part of Perl.
>
> There's nothing fundamentally about Perl that makes it unreadable. Seriously.
> Perl doesn't write unreadable Perl, people do. You ca
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:34:41PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> - Make readability your main objective. Readability is possibly the
> weakest part of Perl.
There's nothing fundamentally about Perl that makes it unreadable. Seriously.
Perl doesn't write unreadable Perl, people do. You can write some
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001 23:34:41 +0100, Otto Wyss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A study in Science (291 P.2165) found out that english speaking children
> has twice as much reading problems as italian speaking children of the
> same age. And about similar difference towards german and french. This
> co
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:34:41PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> As a developer since a quarter century but only a few months in Perl I'm
> closely following the process of creating Perl6.
> This might come from the fact Perl was/is designed by
> english speaking people. It seems that the complexity
As a developer since a quarter century but only a few months in Perl I'm
closely following the process of creating Perl6. I'm exited and also
disappointed what's going on in this process. This morning I read an
article which is completely unrelated to Perl but might give some
insight why Perl is P
40 matches
Mail list logo
