Re:Why I Use Perl: Reliability
by zem on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @04:40PM
(#4039725)
that also highlights one of my perl peeves - having to scrape function args out of @_ rather than declaring them as part of the function definition.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Yes, that sucks. It's not much extra typing:
def function(x, y, z):
versus
sub function { my ($x, $y, $x) = @_; }
The overhead is only really the 'my = @_;' chars, but it is annoying. On the other hand, it does allow you to do things like partially unpack args and pass the rest as a bundle to a super class.
You can partially unpack in Python too:
def method(self, *args):
a, b = args[:2]
super(self).method(*args[:2])
Perl's lack of using the definition for the variables doesn't necessarily make it 'more powerful.'Python's approach is very reasonable. Both Perl and Python are nicer than C varargs.
It's really not that different; you just end up declaring your input arguments one line lower than in most other languages. Not a big deal in practice.
And with @_, you're free to use positional arguments, named arguments, variable arity, etc. without penalty. Some languages only give you some of that.
Most of your life's problems can be solved at CPAN. :-) Just write:
use Method::Signatures::Simple;
http://search.cpan.org/~rhesa/Method-Signatures-Simple-1.02/...But you might instead want to look at this (or similar with Moose support) to get simple type declarations:
http://search.cpan.org/~barefoot/Method-Signatures-20120523/...