Since we've been discussing choices of programming languages lately:

http://www.urubatan.info/2008/04/google-app-engine-when-will-programmers-learn-that-a-language-is-just-a-tool/

"But the real problem here is that these developers do not understand that a programming language is only a tool you need for work."

In a way, I agree but I also disagree.  A language is just a tool and different languages are better for different tasks.  Everyone should know a variety of languages and use the appropriate one for the task at hand.  But what happens when you have a bunch of languages all for the same task (web development)?

I work mostly in PHP for web development: I know all of it's built in functionality, performance characteristics, limitations, libraries, frameworks, etc.  I also know all my own code.  It's just plain not easy to switch to another language; you have to learn all the same-but-different stuff all over again.  I don't have the time for that.  I certainly don't want to have to maintain knowledge in dozens of different platforms either -- as long as I have to maintain PHP code, I don't have much of a desire to fill my head with something different.

I have much less trouble using VB, C#, or C++ for working on stuff other than web development.  It doesn't cloud my perspective on web development because it isn't same-but-different, it's just different.

Programmers are passionate about programming languages because it's their primary interface to the machine.  One should think they should be as opinionated about that as their choice of operating system, editor, or window manager.

Do you know SQL? XML? XHTML? Maybe some bash scripting?  Use perl?

Yes, yes, yes, yes, and I *used* Perl back when it was relevant but anything I did know about it I've forgotten.  Which is my point, I don't use Perl anymore so I don't know Perl anymore.

If I used Perl again enough to *really* know Perl inside and out, I wouldn't have time left to use PHP and then I'd forget PHP.

Do you actually have a point in asking those questions?

> Everyone should know a variety of languages and use the appropriate one for the task at hand.

I agree with you, but there are too many managers out there that think they know better.

That really says something about perl -- I've used it for some fairly advanced tasks, but unless I use it very regularly, my brain quickly punts any knowledge I had about it, and I feel like a noob doing even the most trivial task in it again.

Yet I can jump back to any other language I've known -- even Motorola assembly, real mode assembly, C, C++, GFA Basic, Logo, Pascal, and on and on, in a moment, quickly exactly where I was before.

Perl looks like one big fat regular expression with line breaks and curly braces, to me.

Perl looks like line noise to me.

I keep expecting the source file terminator to be: CARRIER LOST

Yes, and a hammer is "just a tool", but it's good for something, and a screw-driver is "just a tool", but it's good for something else.

The point being, Programming is a complicated business, involving managing complexity, translating desires (and requirements) into a working application.

Some languages are better at some things than other languages.  So having two or three languages you can work in lets you apply an appropriate language to the job at hand.

Also, a programming language is quite a versatile tool.  Some craftsmen get quite fond of the tools that work well for them, and become reluctant to switch to the latest and greatest because it's "newer", without demonstrated benefits.

So I guess bottom line I disagree with the diminuitive term "just" up there -- a programming language is a complicated tool, that a programmer has dedicated perhaps several years of his life to using -- not simply learning, but USING and maintaining applications.  This expertise is not to be tossed away lightly for some perhaps inferior "shiny" language of the day.

>Perl looks like one big fat regular expression with line breaks and curly braces, to me.

That's because you don't know Perl.

These sorts of statements get really tiresome after awhile.  Any language that you don't know, have NO interest in knowing, and generally dislike (probably because of the first two items) is going to look like "gibberish" to you.

I think .NET code looks like overly verbose gibberish.  Ditto Java.  I think C++ looks like some drunk guy rolled his head on his keyboard.  So what?

"That's because you don't know Perl."

I knew Perl enough to, god forbid, actually like Perl.  And I agree, the line-noise feel of the language goes away once you learn what all the noise means.  It makes no different to your brain if something is spelled out in words or symbols once you've used it a few hundred times.

But I disagree:

"Any language that you don't know, have NO interest in knowing, and generally dislike"

Most langauges look and work similarly.  Languages that spell stuff out are easy to figure out.  Even though I've never done any real Python or Ruby coding, I can usually look at code sniplets and know exactly what it's doing.  The same cannot always be said for Perl. 

"I think .NET code looks like overly verbose gibberish."

'Overly verbose gibberish' is almost an oxymoron.  It might be overly verbose but that makes it easier for someone who doesn't know the language to figure out what it means.

"I think C++ looks like some drunk guy rolled his head on his keyboard."

muppet has been reading my code again.

>>It's just plain not easy to switch to another language; you have to learn all the same-but-different stuff all over again.

i had a job where i was coding in vba, vbscript, sql, php, c#, javascript and vb.net.  and it was multiple simultaneous projects in all the different languages on a daily basis.

and i will tell you that, hands down, the hardest part was witching between well written code and pure kludgefests, not switching languages.

Java only looks hard at first before you realize that it's because they went out of their way to make things incredibly easy to use.

Like Aaron alludes to, it's very "english-looking".