in reply to Re^6: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks
in thread Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks

this "3a" versus "3b" doesn't seem logical to me.

the expanded version of question is -

"the project A is dead, but there is another recently started project B. What have the project B very special that makes it different from A, hence it will not fail?"

with all this summed up, the answer "the project A is failed" does not belong here, don't you feel this way?

  • Comment on Re^7: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 10: Kickstarter & Performance Benchmarks
by Will_the_Chill (Pilgrim) on Dec 01, 2013 at 22:58 UTC
    vkon,

    I don't necessarily disagree with you, although I'm not sure it is worthwhile to focus too much on Kurila anyway.

    RPerl is here, Kurila is gone, that's all, no biggie to me.

    Thanks,
    ~ Will
[reply]
      I was complaining about item in a list, that feels a bit odd, to say the least.

      Yet, comparing to another project is useful, and worthwhile: this way you're staying on giant's shoulders and can do more things with fewer efforts.
      BTW I have suspection that Gerard Goessen understands perl internals much better than average person. Do you think you have at least 50% of his skills on internals??

      ...and still - he failed....

      Why??

[reply]
        vkon,

        I know enough about Perl 5 internals to have successfully created typemaps for numbers, scalars, arrays, and hashes, as well as hand-compiling 1 benchmark application.

        I am learning more and more as I go along!

        How much do you know about Perl internals?

        Thanks!

        Perling,
        ~ Will
[reply]
      IOW you provide long list on rperl.vs.kurila differences but dont actually care on its correctness, just having invalid entries in it and doing nothing about it?

      added value of this is exactly zero, then.........

      sorry

[reply]
        vkon,

        1a. Kurila is a new language. Perl 5 code can be (somewhat) converted into Kurila. Kurila code is NOT Perl 5.

        1b. RPerl is strictly a subset of Perl 5. RPerl code IS Perl 5 code. RPerl code will run unmodified by the existing Perl 5 interpreter, and it can also be compiled.

        2a. Kurila is not specifically focused on speed.

        2b. RPerl is specifically focused on speed.

        3a. Kurila is a fork of Perl 5.

        3b. RPerl is an upgrade to Perl 5.

        4a. Kurila breaks backward compatibility.

        4b. RPerl specifically maintains backward compatibility, so compiled RPerl code can be mixed back in with un-compiled Perl 5 code.

        Do you like the new list?

        Thanks!

        Perling,
        ~ Will the Chill
[reply]

In Section Perl News