iain truskett said
> Hmm. Just reread RFC5 and it doesn't really come out with a strong
> recommendation of anything --- as it says "no clear concensus after [a]
> week's discussion". MLCs are a good thing --- they're just tricky to get
> right.
I'm afraid this is just plain true. As the maintainer of this RFC I feel
bound to include an accurate portayal of the comments that were submitted
while it was under debate, and the most accurate description is that there
is no consensus. This should be evident by the fact that some of the very
first suggestions are being brought up again, after already being argued
down on the List.
> Get an editor that supports syntax highlighting (e.g. vim or emacs).
> It'll improve your life no end. Makes things like this easier since it
> will colour distinctly what it believes to be comment.
This type of suggestion came up frequently during the debate (the "keep a
particular functionality on the desktop" argument), but if you are going to
open that door, why not just say 'get a text-editor that can "pound-out" all
the lines of code you want commented?', thereby negating this whole
discussion! I however think that is a bad way to go, maybe because I spent a
lot of time writing Perl on platforms and in text-editors dictatated by
someone else (who was paying me), including Macintosh BBEdit and WinNT
HomeSite (proves me stupid or versatile -- you decide). If a feature is
worth having and we programmers all want it, why should we have to mess
around trying to get crappy text-editor X, Y or Z to do it?
> Just make sure you get the appropriate RFC amended to hold your views if
> you think they're better. Or make a new RFC.
I already did. As did Glenn Linderman. I forward this invitation on to
eveyone else who interested in working to make Perl 6 better.
--Michael
