LWN.net Logo

Perl 6? Yeah, right.

Perl 6? Yeah, right.

Posted Sep 24, 2006 3:21 UTC (Sun) by chromatic (guest, #26207)
In reply to: Perl 6? Yeah, right. by fergal
Parent article: Perl 6? Yeah, right.

Isn't the question "How productive is a good programmer with the language?" much more interesting and insightful than "How badly can a barely-trained monkey write code?"

It's not as if there's a shortage of barely-trained monkeys, nor a limit to the damage they can do with *any* language.


(Log in to post comments)

Perl 6? Yeah, right.

Posted Sep 24, 2006 5:42 UTC (Sun) by fergal (subscriber, #602) [Link]

Isn't the question "How productive is a good programmer with the language?" much more interesting and insightful than "How badly can a barely-trained monkey write code?"

It certainly is but I'm not talking about badly trained monkeys. The more syntax and features you put in the language, the more I have to learn before I can read "average" code. By "average" I don't mean quality, I just mean the code I'm likely to run across reading mailing lists, articles or CPAN code.

Larry likens Perl 5 to a natural language and talks about how long it takes to become fluent. With Perl 6 it will take longer. I haven't seen the killer features that would make me want to bother to do all that again.

Perl 6? Yeah, right.

Posted Sep 28, 2006 11:41 UTC (Thu) by renox (subscriber, #23785) [Link]

Indeed, frankly in my opinion Perl baroque style is its downfall..
Perl5 is bad and Perl6 will be even worse (still IMHO of course).

Ruby or Python are much easier to learn..

Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds