On May 26, 2005, at 10:03 AM, Piers Cawley wrote:
Stevan Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
... The way I
see it working is that the language itself has a bunch of minimal
hooks that
get triggered by various phases of compilation etc. Your editor then
becomes
something that instruments the c
Stevan Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On May 25, 2005, at 5:39 AM, Piers Cawley wrote:
>> One of the 'mental apps' that's been pushing some of the things I've been
>> asking for in Perl 6's introspection system is a combined
>> refactoring/debugging/editing environment for the language.
>
>
On 5/25/05, Deborah Pickett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm afraid that because of the dynamic parse/execute nature of Perl, it
> may be a theoretically intractable problem to parse Perl safely.
Yep. It's not really possible for the parser to distinguish between:
BEGIN {
%main::{'&
On May 25, 2005, at 5:39 AM, Piers Cawley wrote:
One of the 'mental apps' that's been pushing some of the things I've
been
asking for in Perl 6's introspection system is a combined
refactoring/debugging/editing environment for the language.
Maybe I have been reading too much about Smalltalk me
Piers Cawley wrote:
One of the 'mental apps' that's been pushing some of the things I've been
asking for in Perl 6's introspection system is a combined
refactoring/debugging/editing environment for the language. One of the
annoyances of the 'only perl can parse Perl' thing is not so much the trut
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 5/6/05, J Matisse Enzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I've become scared that if Perl is to continue to be viable for large,
>> complex, multi-developer projects that the tools need to serious
>> catch-up with what is available for Java, for example. Th
Matisse,
Just one note before we take this off-list:
Maybe this isn't the right place to keep discussing this, so I'll take
pointers to other places. I'm very worried about the continued
viability of Perl for major projects and am trying connect with other
people and see what can be done about i
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 10:26:26AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
: In other words, Perl 6 is open to the possibility of such an IDE, and
: is going to provide the machinery necessary to build a really good
: one, but I doubt it will become a development milestone.
I think that, just as Perl 1 built in
Thanks for your comments - I was afraid I'd get flamed for suggesting
something wasn't perfect about Perl :-)
On May 6, 2005, at 9:31 AM, Fagyal Csongor wrote:
IMHO subversioning does not have too much to do with the language
itself. Subversioning operates on files. An IDE might integrate some
Matisse,
Will Perl 6 help us have tools that are as good or better than the
ones available for Java, C#, etc?
I've been using Perl since 1994 and for the past several years have
used it to build a number of complex mod_perl applications. I love Perl.
The following may be considered heresy, but
On 5/6/05, J Matisse Enzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've become scared that if Perl is to continue to be viable for large,
> complex, multi-developer projects that the tools need to serious
> catch-up with what is available for Java, for example. Things like:
>
>- Refactoring Support (see
11 matches
Mail list logo
