in reply to Re: What's wrong with Perl 6?
in thread What's wrong with Perl 6?
Now I will not comment on the quality of Perl6. No doubt it has its merits given the development efforts and the experienced team of developers. It may well be a superior language to Perl5.
The real issue here is that by naming the new release Perl6 it degradates its predecessor Perl5 to an 'older now obsolete' release and it cuts off the natural path to an upwards-compatible 6.0 release. Now this may or may not be the intention of the Perl6 development community but it simply does not do justice to the Perl5 achievements, the installed base and happy Perl5 developers. It makes non-Perl programmers weary to start with Perl(5).
My plea would be to rename Perl6 to something else. Call it Perl++ or Perl# if you have it, just don't imply that it the next release that builds upon Perl5.
If Perl6 is the best thing since sliced bread then over time developers will jump on that bandwagon anyway.
Meanwhile let's not kill Perl5.
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re^3: What's wrong with Perl 6?
by herveus (Prior) on May 11, 2007 at 11:42 UTC | |
by Cap'n Steve (Friar) on May 13, 2007 at 05:09 UTC | |
by blazar (Canon) on May 14, 2007 at 09:04 UTC | |
by Cap'n Steve (Friar) on May 14, 2007 at 23:33 UTC | |
by blazar (Canon) on May 15, 2007 at 10:11 UTC | |
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on May 14, 2007 at 09:41 UTC | |
by duff (Parson) on May 14, 2007 at 13:28 UTC | |
by mpeppler (Vicar) on May 11, 2007 at 13:54 UTC | |
|
Re^3: What's wrong with Perl 6?
by chromatic (Archbishop) on May 11, 2007 at 17:43 UTC | |
by tye (Sage) on May 11, 2007 at 18:12 UTC | |
by chromatic (Archbishop) on May 11, 2007 at 18:46 UTC | |
by tye (Sage) on May 11, 2007 at 19:13 UTC | |
by chromatic (Archbishop) on May 11, 2007 at 19:22 UTC | |
|