Re: Perl compiler request - flogging the dead horse!

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Perl compiler request - flogging the dead horse! by FloydATC (Deacon) on Feb 07, 2014 at 21:48 UTC
OK, I'll bite. Please explain how a compiler can deal with this: `while (my $line = <>) { print eval $line; }` [download] -- FloydATC Time flies when you don't know what you're doing	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: Perl compiler request - flogging the dead horse! by Anonymous Monk on Feb 07, 2014 at 21:52 UTC
OK, I'll bite. Please explain how a compiler can deal with this: By not dealing with it, see Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 9: RPerl.org & The Low-Magic Perl Commandments	[reply]
Re^4: Perl compiler request - flogging the dead horse! by FloydATC (Deacon) on Feb 11, 2014 at 07:13 UTC
OK, so basically it can compile "P" but "erl" isn't supported. -- FloydATC Time flies when you don't know what you're doing	[reply]
Re^5: Perl compiler request - flogging the dead horse! by Will_the_Chill (Pilgrim) on Feb 20, 2014 at 07:32 UTC
Re^5: Perl compiler request - flogging the dead horse! by Will_the_Chill (Pilgrim) on Feb 20, 2014 at 07:36 UTC
Re^2: Perl compiler request - flogging the dead horse! by Sanjay (Sexton) on Mar 10, 2016 at 19:58 UTC
I am sure RPerl is a significant improvement. My understanding / guess is that it works for almost all production use perl scripts - bad luck for a few esoteric ones. My questions: Why is there no buzz about this solution? Is it too good to be true? Is the RPerl development team not sufficiently large? Are there any factors preventing the widespread adoption of this differently conceptualised solution? Any attitude / "religious" / not-done-like-this-here biases? Or, it is not worthwhile to implement & too much of a hassle to explain why? RPerl seems to a better tool. Why is the world not beating a road to Will the Chill's door?	[reply]
Re^3: Perl compiler request - flogging the dead horse! by hippo (Archbishop) on Mar 10, 2016 at 23:11 UTC
My understanding / guess is that it works for almost all production use perl scripts - bad luck for a few esoteric ones. My understanding is pretty much the reverse - it works for a few tightly-constrained scripts but not for the majority of general-purpose code that I would use on a daily basis. Why is there no buzz about this solution? Is it too good to be true? See above. The constraints just now are too heavy for most users to get a benefit from it. That said, I think there is a buzz, just not a huge one. I've not attended one of Will's talks yet but (at least some of) those who have say they have been well received. It seems very likely that the more interest it generates, the more people will work with it and then on it and so the pace of development will pick up and more constraints will be lifted resulting in wider use - a spiral of win. You might consider the similar low levels of adoption of Perl6* at present. There is a lot of buzz about that language too but I'm not yet convinced that it will break through. If I had plenty of free time to devote to either project it would be RPerl rather than Perl6* which would get the attention. Other opinions are available :-) * `2019 note: now called Raku`	[reply]