Steve Fink writes:
> We are NOT here to construct a radically better language. We are here to
> design the underpinnings of one.
Perhaps. And by "perhaps", I mean "no".
We're here to say what we'd like to see in the next version of Perl.
These can be big things (currying) or small (hashes returned by
functions instead of long lists). We're giving input to Larry, who
will then design the language. We are just telling Larry what we
would like, and why (i.e., which itch it would scratch).
> If you have an idea that will "add value" to Perl6 but can just as
> well be done after the groundwork for the language has been laid
> out, then please do not write up an RFC on it. It'll just distract.
I completely disagree. If you want something in Perl, now's the time
to ask. We're going to have to nail down the language so people can
begin writing grammars, data structures, regex engines, and so on.
There's no such thing as a small change if that change comes *after*
people have begun coding. That's called "feature creep", as I'm sure
you know.
So I want to encourage people to submit RFCs. Yes, there are a lot of
them. That's Larry's problem, not ours. It's one problem he's glad
to have, I'm sure.
Nat
