What counts is that idiomatic Perl 5 is very different from idiomatic Perl 4 in architecture, whereas idiomatic Perl 6 won’t be nearly as different from idiomatic Perl 5
Really? Many of the (already frowned upon) idioms are abstracted into functions or operators. This takes away a lot of the (in)famous line noise.
Perl 6 does not really reform the way systems written in Perl are to be architectured
Really? Of course, you can still use the same architectures you used in Perl 5 (as you can still use the architectures you used in Perl 4), but there's a wealth of new paradigms entering the language, with roles hopefully shifting around the idiomatic OO landscape forever. That's just one example, but there are many more architectural possibilities new in Perl 6. Many of which go further than the addition of references, namespaces and lexical variables. (It's not entirely accidental that I name three features that PHP does not have. People manage to use PHP and Perl in much the same way, while PHP lacks these things. Try, to use roles, hyperoperators, or environmental variables, in Perl 5 or PHP...)
but in spirit, Perl 6 is much closer to Perl 5 than Perl 5 is to Perl 4.
Agreed, but then, so is Ruby, which is fortunately not called Perl.
Juerd # { site => 'juerd.nl', plp_site => 'plp.juerd.nl', do_not_use => 'spamtrap' }
In reply to Re^4: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by Juerd
in thread perl6 or not perl6 ...
by monkey_boy
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |