| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
A Perl 6 status updateA Perl 6 status updatePosted Jan 2, 2008 18:46 UTC (Wed) by rsidd (subscriber, #2582)In reply to: A Perl 6 status update by dskoll Parent article: A Perl 6 status update
The unfortunate thing about Perl is that it was there first and acquired a huge base. Like Cobol. Both, at least to my eyes, are write-only languages (and I don't think it depends on the programmer's style). As a previous poster said, Ruby is a good Perl6. Still, the complaints seem excessive. If Perl5 will continue to be maintained, or Perl6 can continue to load Perl5 modules, great for those who need to maintain perl code. We still have Fortran77 compilers, so I expect Perl5 will live a long time yet.
(Log in to post comments)
A Perl 6 status update Posted Jan 2, 2008 19:10 UTC (Wed) by pynm0001 (guest, #18379) [Link] > Both [Perl and Cobol], at least to my eyes, are write-only languages > (and I don't think it depends on the programmer's style). Well programmer's style can fix most of what's hard to read about Perl. From my experience the problems that are left are: * Regexs. But pretty much every language tries to be Perl compatible in this regard so we're stuck with it. And anything much more verbose would stink IMO (and Perl provide commented regexps as well) * Indirection syntax/sigils: I'm not opposed to sigils (as that's what allows Ruby to avoid the self.crap everywhere that Python is plagued with) but Perl makes it confusing and even worse, the lists and hashes require references in order to work recursively which is incredibly annoying when you're doing hashes of lists, etc. This is something which I hope they fix for Perl 6. * Exception handling by checking $@: die/eval/$@ is a pretty crappy means of exception handling by it's at least consistently crappy. :-/ Some other things (like the new defined-or operator //= for example) are things which I avoid using out of respect for other programmers in my project who have to maintain the script when I'm away but I'd expect people programming Perl to get acquainted with. There's lots of other things (like a good 80% of the global $ variables) that although are valid Perl should probably be shot.
A Perl 6 status update Posted Jan 3, 2008 20:36 UTC (Thu) by chromatic (guest, #26207) [Link] As a previous poster said, Ruby is a good Perl6. Anyone who says that in seriousness knows very little about either Ruby or Perl 6. Ruby has some nice features, but it has some serious shortcomings (as does Perl 5). Perl 6 corrects those.
A Perl 6 status update Posted Jan 5, 2008 9:18 UTC (Sat) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link] As phrased, you seem to be asserting that (a) Perl5 has shortcomings, (b) Ruby has shortcomings, (c) Perl6 has no shortcomings. I hope that isn't what you mean, but you see how it makes people suspicious of Perl6 when its proponents seem to be advertising it that way...
A Perl 6 status update Posted Jan 5, 2008 15:03 UTC (Sat) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link] > As phrased, you seem to be asserting that (a) Perl5 has shortcomings, > (b) Ruby has shortcomings, (c) Perl6 has no shortcomings. I hope that > isn't what you mean, but you see how it makes people suspicious of > Perl6 when its proponents seem to be advertising it that way... I think what he meant was "(c) Perl6 has /other/ shortcomings, but not the same ones"
A Perl 6 status update Posted Jan 7, 2008 5:17 UTC (Mon) by chromatic (guest, #26207) [Link] Perl 6 may have shortcomings. We won't know what they are until people start using it as much as they use Perl 5. We hope we've designed out most of them. We've certainly tried to design away the keenest problems of Perl 5, Ruby, C++, and Java.
|
|
||||||||||||