in reply to Re^2: Backend diversity for Rakudo
in thread Backend diversity for Rakudo

Frankly speaking most of the Perl 6 implementations in the Past look like "me too" projects. Start with something just because some body else is doing it, ultimately get overwhelmed by the task and abandon it. This is what fundamentally happens when you want to do it just for sake of wanting to do it. The moment there is some technical barrier the motivation evaporates into thin air.

Apart from a few serious attempts like Parrot, Pugs and Rakudo. Other projects have provided good feedback but that was not the aim of those project, was it?

Focus is the name of the game for large projects like this. Parrot wanted to be a good runtime for Perl 6 but what did it end up being? Run time for a near dozen languages but slow with a suboptimal GC. Now Rakudo wanted to run on Parrot but is now aiming to run couple of other backends. The focus keeps dividing and ultimately time passes on and nothing worth while is achieved. People get frustrated and find something else no matter how much you try convince them.

It's not difficult to imagine all successful projects in the open source community example Linux, Perl, Python started as small humble projects but scaled over a period over the time. Alas, that never came to happen with Perl 6. One very large ever evolving spec, with implementations constantly loosing focus and jumping anything new on the market. Will we have to wait for another 10 years while this comes out clean,or never?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Backend diversity for Rakudo
by szabgab (Priest) on Aug 18, 2010 at 04:34 UTC
    I keep wondering why such views are almost always expressed by Anonymous Monks? They can't be bothered to sign up to Perl Monks? They can't personally stand up for their views? Are they total outsiders who just come by bashing or have they had any real contribution to any of the related projects?
[reply]

      What matters to you Anonymity or the Discussion? It doesn't take much to understand that when you diversify, the efforts get diluted. And most of the guys even contributing to these projects Eg:Chromatic seem to agree with it. As you can already see targeting multiple backends was one of the reasons for Pugs debacle.

      However regardless of all that,after reading all the threads here its not very difficult to figure out even other VM's don't have ready-made stuff what Perl 6 needs. Nor will they get it or have it, because they don't exist for Perl 6 alone. Parrot guys are more closer to Perl 6 as they started for that very reason. If parrot doesn't have a feature x then ideally that problem should be solved rather adopting a different VM. And whats the guarantee that other VM's WILL have what features you look for? Or they will get if for us if we want them. And tomorrow if we don't get it there, will we keep jumping VM after VM without covering the spec completely on none of them?

      The need of the hour is spec completion, stability,speed, documentation, libraries and tools and not different backends.

[reply]
        The need of the hour is spec completion, stability,speed, documentation, libraries and tools and not different backends.

        Sure, but you can tell volunteers to work on only what you want them to work on until you're blue in the face, and they'll work on what they want to work on.

        I have a lot more confidence that Parrot will be the best host for Rakudo for the foreseeable future (and the best mechanism for cross-VM portability) than I do that some as-yet unbegun port of PCT and NQP to another VM, but that governs how I spend my time, not how anyone else does.

[reply]
        Who is this "we" you mention?

        Which Anonymous does that include?

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom