in reply to Re^5: What's wrong with Perl 6?
in thread What's wrong with Perl 6?

I think gathering things up and organizing them is useful, especially when they're put into a place that is easily linkable. Over the long haul this tends to reduce the repetition of questions. Well, at least the honest questions. I'll grant you that some of the questioners may be disingenuous, but I usually prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt.

And of course even a perfect FAQ does not prevent people from asking frequently anyway. Nevertheless, I refer you to this sound advice from the Apostle Paul.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: What's wrong with Perl 6?
by petdance (Parson) on May 15, 2007 at 03:15 UTC
    I agree with Paul's point, and I certainly don't mean to sound like code-writing is the only thing that's valuable in Perl 6. But at this point I also don't see that any amount of public communications is going to do anything useful, especially if it's going to draw Perl 6 developers away from coding.

    We can only hold off people with public discussions for so long before they say "I give up on this Perl 6 thing." I feel like anything being done w/Perl 6 that isn't writing code is, at this point, just navel gazing.

    xoxo,
    Andy

[reply]
      I feel like anything being done w/Perl 6 that isn't writing code is, at this point, just navel gazing.

      I agree, if you replace "writing code" with "contributing". There are plenty of tasks that will help Perl 6 arrive that aren't explicitly writing code. Helping write tests--or especially introductory documentation for new users and contributors--is at least as important as writing code right now.

[reply]
        I agree, if you replace "writing code" with "contributing".

        Let's just say "building something."

        xoxo,
        Andy

[reply]

In Section Meditations