Random Perl 6 syntax rant

Paul Makepeace paulm at paulm.com
Tue Apr 1 14:54:38 BST 2008

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:24 AM, <ben at bpfh.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 10:12:13AM +0100, Peter Hickman wrote:
> >
> >It's all part of the plan, make Perl so unreadable that only CAMRA
> >loving beardy wierdos can use it and we'll all have jobs for life.
> That implies that there would ever be a sufficient number of companies
> putting Perl6 into production as to make a job market in it viable.
> I'm still in favour of dropping the 5 from the current production version
> number, ie make the next release Perl 12 and have done with it.

Yeah, seriously, why _is_ it still perl 5?

> Perl6 is not Perl - and having them both thought of as "Perl" will only
> allow the Perl6 effort to poison the well for Perl, without actually
> providing an ecosystem to replace it.

Agreed. At this point, neither seem to particularly benefit from
association with the other; possibly even harming.

But then I've been an open advocate of a name change for years :-)

(dev.perl.org seems to be responding very slowly if at all, if
anyone's listening.)


> Ben

More information about the london.pm mailing list