how about
'raku'
then the final version could be called
'rakudone'
Jim Fuller
udience: robust, trusted, straightforward, safe, supported
colors evoke meaning, shapes/animals, etc do as well ...
thats enough from the 'marketing corner' ... back to programming.
cheers, Jim Fuller
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Guy Hulbert wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-24-03 at 21:
creating a logo by committee is probably the worst way to design such
things ... perl6 logo will be seen in the context of other more
professionally designed logos and like it or not using the basics of
modern branding and marketing will result in something that is more
recognizable no matter
I think if the logo alluded to something revolving around a xmas
present would be appropriate.
-Jim Fuller
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:14 PM, Jon Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
>
> > TSa wrote:
> > > I totally agree! Using 'isa' pulls in the type checker. Do we have the
> > > same option for 'does' e.g. 'doesa'? Or is type checking always implied
> > > in role composi
nice work,
I think this kind of redrafting can be a good foundation for
refactoring ... though I would go further and suggest an xml based
format ... if u have a .odt you can convert this to docbook ;)
one nit pick; drop 'rigorous' in title
Jim Fuller
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 7:44 PM, Richard Dice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What all of myself, chromatic and Richard Hainsworth seem to appreciate is
> that a plan without resources to back it up is almost guaranteed to be
> ineffective. Even more than that, we have an appreciation that planning
can I add a few unsolicited ruminations from a lurker;
* just release perl 6 now and move on
* do not hire 40 year olds with responsibilities, convince the
young to spend their time for free ... isn't that what one is supposed
to do after the age of 40 ?
* use all funds to promote its u
Thanks to all for taking the time to respond at a minimum the
discussion has taught me where perl 6 is headed and where the major
architectural brake points currently are.
gl, Jim Fuller
On Nov 29, 2007 3:44 PM, Smylers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What makes you so sure that nobody will come up with a better way of
> working with XML
there is power in everyone doing the same thing ... this is a
variation of lingua franca design pattern.
For example, would we say that the reason
On Nov 29, 2007 1:15 PM, Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> language? What would you be able to do with it that you couldn't do
> if it were a module
> (arguments such as "use it without putting 'use XML::Foo' at the top"
> considered valid)?
and to answer specifically the question;
'What
On Nov 29, 2007 1:15 PM, Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This has become quite the flame war. There seem to be two sides of
> the argument, you arguing one, everybody else arguing the other.
good to see there is passion underlying perl 6 development ;)
> So to bring some perspective bac
On Nov 29, 2007 12:01 PM, Smylers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, to make a claim for any 'domain-specific' functionality to be added
there are plenty of core perl functions that you or I will use rarely
(both in perl 5 and perl 6).
my claim is that XML is significantly common place, that any ne
On Nov 29, 2007 7:45 AM, Alex Kapranoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> В Чтв, 29/11/2007 в 07:18 +0100, James Fuller пишет:
> > On Nov 28, 2007 8:46 PM, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 28 November 2007 10:59:30 James Fuller wrote:
>
On Nov 28, 2007 8:48 PM, Geoffrey Broadwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 19:59 +0100, James Fuller wrote:
> > XML Parser is what I am talking about
>
> OK -- do you want an event-based parser? Do you want a DOM parser? Do
> you want a simplified tr
On Nov 28, 2007 8:46 PM, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 28 November 2007 10:59:30 James Fuller wrote:
>
> > I do not nec. agree with 'a particular grammer is not' part of the
> > core ... if that grammar is so common to every problem (like reg
On Nov 28, 2007 7:50 PM, Geoffrey Broadwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not too put too strong a bias on it, but:
>
> XML processors are a dime a dozen. There is no way for us to know *now*
> what the "best" XML processor(s) will be a decade from now, and Perl 6
> is intended to be a very long te
On Nov 28, 2007 7:39 PM, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 28 Nov 2007, at 18:28, James Fuller wrote:
>
> > A few things I could imagine; native XML data type (and whatever that
> > means at this late stage)
>
> What might that mean at any stage?
On Nov 28, 2007 7:31 PM, C.J. Adams-Collier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 18:12 +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 06:06:14PM +0100, James Fuller wrote:
> > > there seems to be a dearth of xml 'ness' in Perl 6 design
ence processing deep into perl6.
making perl 6 XML-neutral is a mistake. imho.
cheers, Jim Fuller
On Nov 28, 2007 7:12 PM, Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 06:06:14PM +0100, James Fuller wrote:
> > there seems to be a dearth of xml 'ne
there seems to be a dearth of xml 'ness' in Perl 6 design ... perhaps
before Perl 6 is fully baked its time to review what could live in the
core versus an external module.
thoughts?
cheers, Jim Fuller
21 matches
Mail list logo
