>> > > Perl isn't a programming language - Perl's grammar is much more like
>> > > a natural language than a computer one.
>> >
>> > Well, $I wonder if anyone except @computers can find it natural to put a
>> > f... $dollar_sign in front of every $noun you use.
>>
>> Grammar != vocabulary.
>You're right. Strictly speaking this reduces my posting to
>misaimed babbling. :-)
So, why does all these readers wants this nounmarkers on those program
she writes?
If you don't care for $ or @ for inflections, I welcome the discussion
of "-s", "-'s", and "-es'" as the preferred inflections. Or we can
simply use Damian's recent bilingual work with Latin and Perl if
you prefer a more formal system to sloppy English.
>I don't know a lot about CS but since the perl6 community seems to
>be concerned about Perl6 being as widely accepted as possible I will
>make the following observations.
"Seems" may be the operative term here. Feckless worship of the
false idol of universal popularity will, in attempting to please
everyone, be doomed to please no one. A less proselytist message
would be much useful, perhaps one more along the lines of: "This
is who we are (read: what Perl is). If you like how we are, that's
great--use Perl and be happy. But if you don't like who we are--that
is, *how* we are--then don't use Perl; there are plenty of other
languages for you."
>In my opinion Perl lacks (at least partially) some features which
>I consider important for scripting languages:
Scripting language? What's a scripting language? We're not talking
staging notes from the playwrite now, are we? Try rephrasing using
something unambiguous, such as the generally accepted "programming
language". "Scripting language" has no meaning -- it is nothing but
marketing buzzhype and associate political spin. Ignore it.
>* elimination of pointers (If I want to spend my time considering how
>many dereference operators to use I'll go for ***C++).
>I'm aware, however, that switching from variable assignment to
>name binding (like in Python or Scheme) is a very fundamental change
>and therefore not an issue for perl6 (or is it?).
I wasn't aware that it wasn't an issue. Larry once seriously
contemplated this for perl4++, so why not revisit the notion?
>* no need to declare variables: I think variables should be
>lexically scoped by default, without having to think about and write
>all those 'my's.
>* convenient handling of structured data/records/objects with
> attributes: I'm referring to what you can do (for example) with
> Python instances: foo.member = bar
$foo->{member} = bar;
"If you want Python, you know where to find it."
> I guess I'm not the only one who prefers this to
> $$foo{'member'} = $bar (which of course has nothing to do
> with $foo{'member'} = $bar).
>Maybe Perl is sane and I'm just not getting the point. :-)
Making Perl look just like Java, Python, and BASIC is specifically
*not* the point.
If you want to write a new language, then please do. The world
needs more of them. Just please don't call it Perl.
--tom
