Re: Is it too late for Parrot VM?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Is it too late for Parrot VM? by jettero (Monsignor) on Jun 22, 2008 at 18:14 UTC
What I find most irritating about these articles is that they completely dismiss progress in Perl v5 I totally agree. In fact, judging from perl5.10 I'd say it almost doesn't matter of perl6 ever finishes. We keep getting fine and exciting features inspired or created in perl6. I think the only people that really obsess about perl6 are the people working on it, the people testing it, and outsiders who think we need perl6 to move forward. I also think parrot is exciting whether or not there are other virtual machines. I day dream of a day when I can compile very high level languages to a virtual machine of my choice. Maybe my perl6 runs on a jvm, a .net, and a parrot just fine... UPDATE: Yeah, I didn't intend any negative connotation... I fail to see how you could work on a project as big as perl6 without being a little obsessed. -Paul	[reply]
Re^3: Is it too late for Parrot VM? by moritz (Cardinal) on Jun 22, 2008 at 18:37 UTC
I think the only people that really obsess about perl6 are the people working on it, the people testing it Who are incidentally the people who (should) now it best ;-) (OK, that's a stupid point - they know it best because they are exited about it ;-) That being said, I see that parrot constantly progresses, and that the other virtual machines (like jvm and dotnet) don't really have the same target audience. Yes, they are moving towards supporting dynamic languages, but it's not the same as if the VM were designed for it from ground up. Just compare the CPU time for taking a continuation. It's a bit like saying Cygwin is a competitor for full-blown Unix implementations. Actually the closer competitors are (IMHO) various VMs that were designed for executing lisp. Funny thing that nobody writes about those in the popular tech blogs.	[reply]
Re^2: Is it too late for Parrot VM? by alexm (Chaplain) on Jun 22, 2008 at 19:01 UTC
why would any of us care how many lame languages they can run, if they can't run the best? Just out of interest, in the list of more than 200 languages hosted by JVM I found a reference to perljvm. The link was broken, but a quick search on Google provided a couple of pointers: the perljvm project hosted on GNU Savannah, and the paper titled perljvm: Using B to Facilitate a Perl Port To the Java Virtual Machine, by Bradley M. Kuhn. Although it seems that there's not been much progress on the project since its inception.	[reply]
Re^3: Is it too late for Parrot VM? by holli (Abbot) on Jun 22, 2008 at 19:50 UTC
Did you actually follow that perljvm link? I ask because there's absolutely nothing to see there. 0 files, no description, no whatever. Btw, those wo are looking for a scripting language that runs on a jvm should check out Groovy and maybe the web application framework Grails. holli, /regexed monk/	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: Is it too late for Parrot VM? by alexm (Chaplain) on Jun 22, 2008 at 20:53 UTC
Did you actually follow that perljvm link? I ask because there's absolutely nothing to see there. 0 files, no description, no whatever. I'm not sure which perljvm link you're referring to. If you mean the perljvm project on Savannah, please note that the CVS source is browsable from the source code menu: http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/?root=perljvm HTH	[reply]
Re^2: Is it too late for Parrot VM? by zby (Vicar) on Jun 22, 2008 at 18:37 UTC
You don't need to agree with the article to find it interesting. It is also interesting to see what is the impression that outsiders get from the Parrot project. And it is also beneficial to have this mentioned here - because now you have a chance to correct them - by commenting the article at the source :)	[reply]
Re^3: Is it too late for Parrot VM? by Mutant (Priest) on Jun 23, 2008 at 09:56 UTC
You don't need to agree with the article to find it interesting. True, but I fail to see how this article is particularly interesting. It's 3 paragraphs of poorly spelt opinion that doesn't really offer anything new, or back up any of it's assertions with anything substantial. I welcome any reasonable, well thought out criticism of anything I work on, or any project I'm involved in, or even support. However, this is basically FUD. InfoQ has some interesting articles, but they seem to value quantity highly, and a lot of their posts are just padding. No one really knows if Parrot is too late, will succeed of fail, or whatever. It's irrelevant how quickly something is released if it offers significant advantages over whatever else is available. (That's not a guarantee of success, but success or failure does not rest on how early/late it was released at that point). On top of that, I don't think it's useful to consider the success of Parrot in isolation. There's a good chance Parrot will fail if Perl 6 isn't widely used. Would the JVM or the CLR be widely used if they didn't have at least one popular language to run on them? (Note: I'm defining success above as "widespread adoption". There might be other definitions, of course. Also note, I'm not involved in Parrot or Perl 6 development).	[reply]
Re^3: Is it too late for Parrot VM? by nikosv (Deacon) on Jun 23, 2008 at 09:05 UTC
My point exactly.I too find it distressing and don't agree with it, but still find it interesting since it's good to be aware of other developments and possess a holistic view on a matter	[reply]