Sure things took longer than expected, but I get the impression that the general populace view this as "unacceptable" or "bad" or a sign that perl6 is doomed or something. Haven't people heard that old saying about how battle plans never survive first contact with the enemy?
The way I look at it is this: we made a plan and while executing that plan we needed to make a slight course adjustment and then again and again as more of the reality of the process unfolded and continues to unfold. This is a good thing as long as we don't lose sight of the goal (I don't think of the people doing the work have lost sight of the goal). What boggles my mind though is people who think we should have already arrived at our goal of perl6. It's still being designed! Even completely specified, fully funded projects take too long and go overbudget and they expect a minimally funded and partially specified project to be completed based on initial estimates?
I'm starting to feel a rant rise in me now, so I think I'll stop :-) But I get a general feel that Perl6's detractors all suffer from "can't you just ..." syndrome. See Andy Lester's weblog.
In reply to Re^2: Building Perl6
by duff
in thread Building Perl6
by duff
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |