On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Steven D'Aprano < st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au> wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:21:05 -0800, Tim Roberts wrote: > >> Perl 6, on the other hand, is still fantasyware a decade after its >> announcement. It is, for the most part, THE canonical example of the >> wrong way to conduct a development effort. > > Out of curiosity, and completely off-topic, why has Perl 6 gone so badly?
- Super-dramatic changes to the language (some people think Python 3 is/was radical, but it's got nothing on Perl 6) - Complete from-scratch rewrite (c.f. Joel Spolsky's "Things You Should Never Do") - Ambitious implementation strategy, i.e. Parrot. It will be powerful and useful beyond just Perl when complete, but that extra complexity comes at a price. => Although why Pugs and the other implementations are likewise held up, I have no idea. But then I'm not a Perlite (Is that the right word?). For that matter, it remains to be seen whether the Python 3 changeover will fare better. But I'm still pretty hopeful. At least we have a complete reference implementation. Cheers, Chris -- What we need is some sort of coordinated library porting effort. Or a 3.x-specific killer app. http://blog.rebertia.com
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
