|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 06:37 PM EDT |
Nonsense.
There are programs written in Perl in 1990 that still work without any change.
There have been huge changes in the Perl language in those 20 years, but they
have generally (not always but with only very small exceptional end cases) been
designed to add new capabilities without breaking any of the old ones. Any Perl
programmer who was competent and familiar with the modern Perl idioms and usage
would generally find lots of "bad practice" to complain about in the
old code - but it still runs and the only reason for re-writing it to match the
current language norms would be to make it easier to maintain or extend, not to
make it work again.
I can't say whether the Java API was a good or bad one - I've never written or
maintained Java code, so I don't know whether the subsquent releases of Java API
broke the original interfaces, but if they did that says something about whether
the Java API was well designed, it does not prove whether there is such a thing
as a good API.
John Macdonald[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 09:28 PM EDT |
A good proportion of that is fixing the bugs found in V1 and not fixed until
V6.1
Extending the language brings its own set of bugs that need fixing.
On a slightly related matter, the number of 'fixes' being released for .Net V4
is simply silly. It must be the most buggy bit of software ever released by
Redmond and that is saying something.
Complex_Number not logged in, sitting in a Cafe by the beach about to enjoy the
Sunset in San Diego.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|