Re^3: What's wrong with Perl 6?

Well, what you say makes sense, but...

I've seen various people bash perl 6 for a variety of reasons. Some of the ones I can think of right off are

From this, I really can't say if duff is presenting what he believes are reasons for people to bash Perl 6 or if those are the reasons those people invoke... Maybe it's my English...

duff, could you please shed some light? :-)

If what jdporter says is correct, I apologize :-)

Comment on Re^3: What's wrong with Perl 6?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: What's wrong with Perl 6? by duff (Parson) on May 10, 2007 at 19:18 UTC
jdporter is correct. I guess I should have left in the paragraph where I mention that I've consumed the Perl 6 Kool-aid and have been keeping close watch on Perl's future (beyond 5.x) since before Perl 6 even existed (Who else remembers Topaz? :-) No worries though. duff	[reply]
Re^5: What's wrong with Perl 6? by cog (Parson) on May 11, 2007 at 09:10 UTC
A-ah! Everything makes sense now. In that case, I stand corrected, I apologize for any rudeness and I cheer your effort! :-) Anyway, maybe you can use my previous comments in the answers you'll compile. Cheers :-)	[reply]