Damn Perl and it's inequalities!
(10:42:33) scottchiefbaker: I was telling Ben today
(10:42:36) scottchiefbaker: you know why perl sucks?
(10:42:39) scottchiefbaker: because of != and ne
(10:42:41) scottchiefbaker: and == and eq
(10:42:44) scottchiefbaker: that's LAME!
(10:42:48) bradwhit2: why?
(10:42:58) bradwhit2: how else would you let it know if you want a numeric or string comparison?
(10:42:58) scottchiefbaker: pain in the butt
(10:43:05) scottchiefbaker: it SHOULD KNOW
(10:43:17) scottchiefbaker: if I'm comparing a string and a string it's easy
(10:43:18) bradwhit2: no
(10:43:26) bradwhit2: because sometimes you want a numeric comparison on 2 strings
(10:43:26) scottchiefbaker: if it's numeric it should totally know
(10:43:38) scottchiefbaker: well in that RARE case you can use a function
(10:43:41) scottchiefbaker: or a diff operator
(10:43:46) scottchiefbaker: the DEFAULT should be smart
(10:43:56) bradwhit2: wow, i totally don't buy your logic.
(10:44:08) bradwhit2: go argue that to C programmers
(10:44:10) scottchiefbaker: The default should be to JUST use ==
(10:44:14) scottchiefbaker: I'm not talking C
(10:44:16) bradwhit2: where the variable types are completely explicit
(10:44:22) bradwhit2: ask them why they didn't do it.
(10:44:23) scottchiefbaker: C programmers are anal and can do what they want
(10:44:34) scottchiefbaker: but for Perl/PHP high end stuff
(10:44:38) scottchiefbaker: it should be smart about
(10:44:51) scottchiefbaker: it ALREADY tries to be smart about being typeless
(10:44:59) scottchiefbaker: $i = 1;
(10:45:01) scottchiefbaker: $i = "foo"
(10:45:09) scottchiefbaker: if it's smart enough to figure that out
(10:45:10) bradwhit2: yep. so as a result you need to let it know what type of comparison you want
(10:45:16) scottchiefbaker: it should know when to use == or eq automatically
(10:45:21) scottchiefbaker: No I don't
(10:45:23) scottchiefbaker: I don't in PHP
(10:45:32) scottchiefbaker: I never have that problem in PHP because they did it RIGHT!
(10:45:35) bradwhit2: php is for fucktards
(10:45:50) scottchiefbaker: I believe Fitz said PHP is for pussy lickers
(10:45:59) scottchiefbaker: I've never been happier to be a pussy licker
(10:46:05) bradwhit2: :-P
(10:46:14) bradwhit2: if canada were a programming language
(10:46:14) scottchiefbaker: I'm all for typeful comparison
(10:46:16) bradwhit2: it would be php
(10:46:23) scottchiefbaker: I TOTALLY understand the need for them
(10:46:45) scottchiefbaker: it seems like 99% of the time people don't need to specify something that's not detectable
(10:46:57) scottchiefbaker: in THOSE rare cases you should use a function to compare
(10:46:58) scottchiefbaker: that's cool
(10:46:59) scottchiefbaker: I've done that
(10:47:24) bradwhit2: you should totally write up an RFC and deliver it to larry wall at OScon !!!
(10:48:03) scottchiefbaker: MAYBE I WILL!
(10:42:36) scottchiefbaker: you know why perl sucks?
(10:42:39) scottchiefbaker: because of != and ne
(10:42:41) scottchiefbaker: and == and eq
(10:42:44) scottchiefbaker: that's LAME!
(10:42:48) bradwhit2: why?
(10:42:58) bradwhit2: how else would you let it know if you want a numeric or string comparison?
(10:42:58) scottchiefbaker: pain in the butt
(10:43:05) scottchiefbaker: it SHOULD KNOW
(10:43:17) scottchiefbaker: if I'm comparing a string and a string it's easy
(10:43:18) bradwhit2: no
(10:43:26) bradwhit2: because sometimes you want a numeric comparison on 2 strings
(10:43:26) scottchiefbaker: if it's numeric it should totally know
(10:43:38) scottchiefbaker: well in that RARE case you can use a function
(10:43:41) scottchiefbaker: or a diff operator
(10:43:46) scottchiefbaker: the DEFAULT should be smart
(10:43:56) bradwhit2: wow, i totally don't buy your logic.
(10:44:08) bradwhit2: go argue that to C programmers
(10:44:10) scottchiefbaker: The default should be to JUST use ==
(10:44:14) scottchiefbaker: I'm not talking C
(10:44:16) bradwhit2: where the variable types are completely explicit
(10:44:22) bradwhit2: ask them why they didn't do it.
(10:44:23) scottchiefbaker: C programmers are anal and can do what they want
(10:44:34) scottchiefbaker: but for Perl/PHP high end stuff
(10:44:38) scottchiefbaker: it should be smart about
(10:44:51) scottchiefbaker: it ALREADY tries to be smart about being typeless
(10:44:59) scottchiefbaker: $i = 1;
(10:45:01) scottchiefbaker: $i = "foo"
(10:45:09) scottchiefbaker: if it's smart enough to figure that out
(10:45:10) bradwhit2: yep. so as a result you need to let it know what type of comparison you want
(10:45:16) scottchiefbaker: it should know when to use == or eq automatically
(10:45:21) scottchiefbaker: No I don't
(10:45:23) scottchiefbaker: I don't in PHP
(10:45:32) scottchiefbaker: I never have that problem in PHP because they did it RIGHT!
(10:45:35) bradwhit2: php is for fucktards
(10:45:50) scottchiefbaker: I believe Fitz said PHP is for pussy lickers
(10:45:59) scottchiefbaker: I've never been happier to be a pussy licker
(10:46:05) bradwhit2: :-P
(10:46:14) bradwhit2: if canada were a programming language
(10:46:14) scottchiefbaker: I'm all for typeful comparison
(10:46:16) bradwhit2: it would be php
(10:46:23) scottchiefbaker: I TOTALLY understand the need for them
(10:46:45) scottchiefbaker: it seems like 99% of the time people don't need to specify something that's not detectable
(10:46:57) scottchiefbaker: in THOSE rare cases you should use a function to compare
(10:46:58) scottchiefbaker: that's cool
(10:46:59) scottchiefbaker: I've done that
(10:47:24) bradwhit2: you should totally write up an RFC and deliver it to larry wall at OScon !!!
(10:48:03) scottchiefbaker: MAYBE I WILL!