in reply to Re^8: No, "We" Don't Have to Do Anything
in thread No, "We" Don't Have to Do Anything

This node falls below the community's minimum standard of quality and will not be displayed.
  • Comment on Re^9: No, "We" Don't Have to Do Anything

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^10: No, "We" Don't Have to Do Anything
by diotalevi (Canon) on Feb 28, 2006 at 18:50 UTC

    As someone who has interests in extending perl5 and eventually using perl6, this is the primary place to discuss either. This is exactly the forum of my peers. This last few weeks I've been thinking about making perl5 lispier and actually came up with something saner than anything else that I think came before it (fake out B::Deparse with Test::MockObjects and eval the result).

    That you think perl5 should be static isn't my concern. I don't care. I'm working on my neighborhood improvement project and that happens to be multilingual. Just because you prefer to be in a single language neighborhood isn't going to make me stop working on things I think are fun and interesting. It also isn't going to stop me from talking about them in perl5 places. Cuz, see, I am coding perl.

    Now go away with your "please go away" statements.

    ⠋⠥⠉⠅ ⠕⠋⠋⠄ ⠞⠺⠊⠞

    A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
Re^10: No, "We" Don't Have to Do Anything
by tirwhan (Abbot) on Feb 28, 2006 at 21:52 UTC
    Perhaps I should just give up on Perlmonks.

    Given that you seem to be doing nothing but spam this site with obnoxious and childish attacks on work other people are doing for the Perl community, I for one can't help but think "yes, for the love of God, please do, and good riddance".


    All dogma is stupid.