I see little point in versioning or emulation until we have spec
versions and complete test suite versions that can validate them.
And I see no need to "practice" versioning before that happens; it
will just slow down the drive to complete 6.0.0, and there will
(I hope) be time to consider the fine
Em Sáb, 2010-03-20 às 22:23 +0300, Richard Hainsworth escreveu:
> Here it is the very language that is changing.
> For instance, =$fh was used to generate input from a file. Now it is
> $fh.lines
Note that I did mention versioned dependencies for grammar, CORE and
setting. So yes, considering the
Thanks Matt,
I really like perl 6 and moose for that matter. :-) I feel
that these implementations of truly take it into the application
programmming arena. And, am hoping perl is thought of when building
larger enterprise applications in the future once there is a true
product
On Saturday 20 March 2010 at 12:23, Richard Hainsworth wrote:
> In other words, I am suggesting a sort of mapping of the syntax of perl6
> so that stable areas can us be used, perhaps avoiding instruments that
> are not yet explicitly stable.
That assumes it's possible to know with sufficient c
I actsully read the fact sheets in the past and want to confirm that a
stable production qaulity release of perl6 is coming out this April or
at the berry least the summer?
Sent from my iPhone
Wendell Hatcher
wendell_hatc...@comcast.net
303-520-7554
Blogsite: http://thoughtsofaperlprogrammer.
Not really a versioned dependencies.
When a working module is updated to have new functionality, the old
version continues to work.
Here it is the very language that is changing.
For instance, =$fh was used to generate input from a file. Now it is
$fh.lines
Old examples that I wrote using
Daniel Ruoso wrote:
Em Sáb, 2010-03-20 às 12:16 +0300, Richard Hainsworth escreveu:
Suppose we define a domain of stability as syntax/functionality/features
that will not be changed until a milestone is reached, with the
guarantee that if the language specification changes before then,
backwar
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Richard Hainsworth
wrote:
> Re-posting to list.
>
> Original Message
> Subject: Re: Where's the release announcement?
> Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 07:39:17 +0300
> From: Richard Hainsworth
> To: Darren Duncan
> References: <4ba329
Em Sáb, 2010-03-20 às 12:16 +0300, Richard Hainsworth escreveu:
> Suppose we define a domain of stability as syntax/functionality/features
> that will not be changed until a milestone is reached, with the
> guarantee that if the language specification changes before then,
> backwards compatibili
Re-posting to list.
Original Message
Subject:Re: Where's the release announcement?
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 07:39:17 +0300
From: Richard Hainsworth
To: Darren Duncan
References: <4ba329a0.7030...@rusrating.ru>
<4ba32f1e.70...@darrenduncan.net>
<4ba3c76e.1050
I know PM does not like the word 'stability' for language development,
and I have just posted a response to Wendell Hatcher's question
justifying Patrick's approach.
However, some other questions arose when I was considering 'usability',
which Patrick sets as a goal for Rakudo *, as opposed fo
I too re-read PM's journal. Note his explicit desire to avoid
'stability' as a goal at this stage for rakudo because of its imprecision.
We often use words that have different shades of meanings for different
people/situations, eg., what is a 'short' time? Consider how a child
might answer, as
12 matches
Mail list logo
