Re^2: Perl 6 release dates - two years later

...because Perl 6 should have been released...

Let me put on my cranky implementor hat here. The only people who can legitimately say that perl 6 should be doing anything, or be released at any time, are the ones who've actively done work on it. (So I can say should. And will)

If you've not done anything or, worse, been actively involved on perl6-language (a festering swamp that holds, no joke, a high place in the list of things that have delayed perl 6 (second only to the various lord of the rings DVDs)), you're just watching. People watching don't get shoulds. "Would be nice", "looks like opportunity X", "pity I've gotta move on to something else", sure. But not should. Should is for the people doing things, not the people watching.

Comment on Re^2: Perl 6 release dates - two years later

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Perl 6 release dates - two years later by Elian (Parson) on Oct 21, 2004 at 16:49 UTC
Also note, as I'm being cranky, that if you have contributed to the development in non-development ways (that is, contributed money to the perl foundation for perl 6 development, done sysadmin or other infrastructure support for perl 6) you've definitely got good reason to ask "What the hell's going on?" (Though that is, certainly, a different thing to ask)	[reply]
Re^4: Perl 6 release dates - two years later by Juerd (Abbot) on Oct 21, 2004 at 18:34 UTC
if (...) you've definitely got good reason to ask "What the hell's going on?" (Though that is, certainly, a different thing to ask) There's no need for that. For as far as is publicly known, I know exactly what is going on. Juerd # { site => 'juerd.nl', plp_site => 'plp.juerd.nl', do_not_use => 'spamtrap' }	[reply]
Re^3: Perl 6 release dates - two years later by Juerd (Abbot) on Oct 21, 2004 at 18:17 UTC
Let me put on my cranky implementor hat here. Not a good idea, probably. The cranky hat doesn't look well with my ";)". The "should" referred to my previous estimate, not to any reality. To clarify it further: in order for me to "win" my own "contest", it "should" have been released over a year ago. I agree with most of what you say, am semi-active on perl6-language (oops, sorry), and donated to the fund (and plan on doing so again, repeatedly once every year, if I can afford it). I actively discuss Perl 6 on several fora and in general am very positive. I agree with the "released when ready" idea and prefer years of waiting to having a horribly implemented language. I may not agree with every decision made (things bothering me are ~~unicode~~non-ASCII operators, confusing use of the colon, overuse of the new french quoty qw, \d**{} and arbitrary limits like do-while), but I think Perl 6 is a really cool language. I do not mind that it is not released yet for I understand that quality takes time, and that implementation with an unfinished design leads to chaos. Please, get rid of the cranky hat and re-read my post. This time, pay more attention to the ";)" and read the entire thread in the appropriate context: fun speculation. Or buy me a cranky head too, so that I can start a troll/flame war. It would be about something else, though, because debate is HARD when you actually agree with one another. Juerd # { site => 'juerd.nl', plp_site => 'plp.juerd.nl', do_not_use => 'spamtrap' }	[reply]


Just another Perl shrine
	PerlMonks