In 2009 I predicted Perl 6 would get to 6.0.0 and a generally robust state about a year from now.
In the very link you posted, you predicted that Rakudo would be "ready in 2010 for use in limited ways" and in "another year or two (from 2009) to be usable for limited production contexts". If I were you, I wouldn't keep bringing up your powers of prognostication.
... nor the negativity toward Perl 6 being voiced by some leaders in the Perl community which I suspect has had an effect...
Why do I keep having to tell you that this argument is nonsense?
People aren't avoiding Rakudo because I say it's a project floundering in the wilderness without the supervision of an adult who really wants to make it into a useful and usable product for general consumption. People are avoiding Rakudo because P6 hasn't delivered anything useful and usable for general consumption in thirteen years. How many times (for one example) does someone like Sebastian Riedel have to say "Gee, I wish Rakudo supported sockets!" before you figure out that the lack of any sane socket support is keeping him from doing anything he wants to do with it? How many times (for another example) does someone like me have to say "Gee, I wish Rakudo had documentation that wasn't a pile of specification tests hyperlinked to synopses under constant churn!" before you figure out that maybe documentation would be a nice thing? How many times does someone have to get on #perl6 and say "I tried to use this module, but it didn't work!" before you figure out that maybe keeping a working ecosystem might let people get things done?
As for Solomon's benchmark, it doesn't rise to the level of data because it's merely an anecdote without context. Until and unless someone can explain why one implementation is faster than the other, it's just gossip.
|Replies are listed 'Best First'.|
Re^4: A $dayjob Perl 6 program that runs 40x faster on the JVM than on Parrot
by raiph (Deacon) on Aug 04, 2013 at 20:15 UTC