in reply to Re^2: modules = minilanguages?
in thread modules = minilanguages?

To a certain extent. Perl5 is not close to the most malleable language in that respect. Most functional languages are much further along and have been for a long time, and Perl6 will be a world apart from Perl5. (I can't wait — I've said before that the thought of TheDamian tinkering with Perl6 gives me the shivers, both in a good and bad way. ;-))

Makeshifts last the longest.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: modules = minilanguages?
by Anonymous Monk on Dec 22, 2004 at 14:22 UTC
    Thanks for the input, everyone. Oh, and why does it give you shivers?
[reply]

      Just look at some of Damion's previous work. At a recent Perl conference, he demonstrated a Turing Maching inside Conway's Game of Life. I never would have thought this was possible, and coming from anyone else, I would have thought it was a joke. But there Damion was up on stage, showing that the whole thing worked out.

      "There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.

[reply]

        His name is Damian :-) — Damian Conway. But he's not the Conway from Conway's Game of Life.

        The thought that Life can be used to run a turing machine isn't too surprising btw — they're both cellular automata, and just about anything you can do with one of those can be emulated with the aid of another.

        If that blows your mind, try reading the proof that Minesweeper is NP-complete.

        Makeshifts last the longest.

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom