String implementations

[Jarrod]

On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 06:41:29 +0000, Janice Caron wrote:

> On 1/20/08, Jarrod <qwerty at ytre.wq> wrote:
>> I am, and it's making working with user-editable config files an
>> annoyance that perl avoids very easily.
> 
> Could you possibly explain that, for the benefit of those of us who
> don't speak perl?
> 
> My limited understanding is the perl was invented before Unicode, and
> probably even before the wheel, so either it deals with Unicode by not
> dealing with it at all, or else it's a recent edition to the language
> (or else I've got it completely wrong - like I said, I don't speak
> perl).

Perl is still being constantly updated although it is indeed quite old. 
And it works quite well with unicode as you would expect from a language 
that prides itself on text manipulation.


> Also, isn't perl an interpreted language? You can get away with a lot
> more in an interpreted language, but you pay the price in speed.

Yes, It's interpreted and that does cost it a fair amount of speed, but I 
see it as a worthwhile trade off for what it can do with strings.
 

> Moreover, working with user-editable config files - I would have thought
> that a job for a text editor, not a programming language. I'm confused.

Indeed, you are a tad confused. I'm allowing the user to edit config 
files so that my GUI application can read it in on startup and use it to 
populate a dialog display as well as fill out numerous options involving 
how it deals with a web interface. Because I don't know what the user is 
going to input I have to do a fair amount of converting.

Yes, this in indeed the main motivation behind this entire rant.