Here's my RFC todo list which I am dropping like a good mensch
on the occasion of Friday Evening.
RFC: Perl6 is Final. There will Be No Perl7
We declare that our framework willbe so flexiblke
that anything can be done with it and there will be no penalty
for something being in-core opposed to out-of-core and so on.
RFC: Everything is Accessible and Mutable
From tokenizing up. See below for how to pull this off.
At least, the core core core of what's left is just a smidgen larger
than FORTH. Like, FORTH plus data structures plus exceptions plus
garbage collection.
RFC: The perl6 reference implementation, no matter how slow it is,
will be written in perl5, in some kind of well defined virtual machine.
It should be possible do Data::Dumper out a emulated perl6 instance
and load it into another and there you are, except the file handles
are all confused (unless you've got a way-fancy OS that can cope with
such things)
RFC: It's all exception handling. I imagine the core syntax description
as a set of catch clauses. Every token generates a "TOKEN-$whatever"
exception, which is caught according to the current situation. How's
that for a general paradigm? These things can be overloaded as needed to
implement Macros, variant syntaces, variant semantics, and so on.
RFC: Implemnentation: Unified containers are trees of storage nodes,
and we do our own memory management with them
RFC: Garbage collection: We keep reference counting, with a big
node pool, occasionally defragment it if we can, to free the top of it.
Have a nice weekend.
Nathan Torkington wrote:
>
> 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
--
David Nicol 816.235.1187 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Does despair.com sell a discordian calendar?
