At 11:03 AM -0600 7/7/02, Thom Boyer wrote:
>And thanks for the pointers. I've been out of touch with the Perl
>community the last couple of years. It's been exciting seeing how
>Perl 6 is shaping up, but I'm having a hard time making up lost
>time. The postings to perl6-language often take for granted features
>of Perl 6 which I haven't been able to find in any of the
>apocalypses or exegeses, so I've been plowing through the archive
>trying to get more background -- but I hadn't yet made it back to
>April 2001!
>
>Knowing that coroutines are already under discussion WRT Perl, I was
>able to google the existence of RFC 31 and other references to
>coroutines in Damian's corpus. (Including a slide show from August
>2001 titled "Perl 6 Prospectus", where it is in the "What we might
>see" section.) I've been unable to determine whether coroutines are
>really "slated for P6," as you suggest. Has there been any
>indication whether those suggestions have met with Larry's approval?
Part of the problem is sorting out what's going into Perl 6 from the
stuff that's going into Parrot, the VM we're writing to run Perl 6.
Parrot will support coroutines and continuations, since they make a
number of things very much simpler. (Including Ruby and Python
support :)
Exposing this stuff at the language level's more problematic, as
Larry's already said. Continuations tend to make people's heads
*hurt*, even if they finally understand them. (And many people don't)
They're great as building blocks, but even in languages where they're
fundamental constructs most people don't make use of them. (Or use
them very sparingly)
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
