in reply to Re^4: What's wrong with Perl 6?
in thread What's wrong with Perl 6?

I cant figure out why you think such an attitude is in Perl 6's best interests.

If it isnt written in C (or perhaps C++) its going to find itself at a disadvantage competing in the marketplace with languages that are.

IMO if Perl 6 doesnt end up with a C implementation it will end up as one of many interesting but ultimately trivial footnotes in the history of computing.

And that not that an outcome that I would like to see.

---
$world=~s/war/peace/g

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: What's wrong with Perl 6?
by chromatic (Archbishop) on May 14, 2007 at 15:12 UTC
    If it isnt written in C (or perhaps C++) its going to find itself at a disadvantage competing in the marketplace with languages that are.

    C# and Java seem to be doing just fine, and Ruby's taking off despite being written in C and very slow. I don't understand your reasoning.

[reply]
      C# and Java seem to be doing just fine

      Are C# and Java not implemented in "C (or perhaps C++)"? If they are, why do you try to invoke them as counterexamples?

      A word spoken in Mind will reach its own level, in the objective world, by its own weight
[reply]

        Because somehow Parrot (written mostly in C) doesn't count for Perl 6, as far as I understood the post to which I replied.

[reply]

In Section Meditations