Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
No such thing as a small change
 
PerlMonks  

Re^7: Ovid's take on the renaming of "Perl6" (updated)

by chromatic (Archbishop)
on Aug 30, 2019 at 15:37 UTC ( #11105312=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^6: Ovid's take on the renaming of "Perl6" (updated)
in thread Ovid's take on the renaming of "Perl6"

Even worse, now you need to elaborate why you're sure that it's a lost cause and add arguments to your critic.

That's not my argument, but why do I need to elaborate? What's unclear about "this has been promised since 2011, and it hasn't happened yet, so why should I believe it's right around the corner"?

Of course you could watch the videos first and tell us afterwards where the logical fallacies are. This might be easier.

Why? What's changed in the design since 2011-2013?

When I profiled Rakudo, I proposed a simple grammar change to freeze the definition of .ws to a well-understood character class so that every grammar rule wouldn't have to go through a method lookup between tokens. Larry said no. (I can't remember if that was a 30% or 40% speed improvement in the Rakudo test suite.)

NQP is pretty speedy. It's not bad for a dynamic language. Rakudo isn't speedy. Last time I looked, that was inherent to the design.

Furthermore, the reason we wanted to get as much Parrot code out of C as possible in Lorito is to learn the lessons of JavaScript implementations: the more code written in JavaScript, the faster it can go. Nothing I've seen in Moar suggests it's taken that approach. Maybe it can, but until it does, I don't expect it will improve performance in the large by orders of magnitude.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: Ovid's take on the renaming of "Perl6"
by LanX (Cardinal) on Sep 02, 2019 at 13:30 UTC
    Hi,

    I'm late in replying because sometimes I think I need to build up the necessary know-how in order to give an adequate answer.

    Unfortunately this often leads to silently starving threads, so here an emergency before time-out response. ;-)

    > but why do I need to elaborate?

    You can't expect us - the general public - to know the detailed discussions of Perl6's genesis.

    If you claim it's not easily possible in the future , then it's appropriate to list arguments.

    The opposing side can counter this with other arguments. That's how scientific discussions work.

    > Why? What's changed in the design since 2011-2013?

    Again I don't know, I have to rely on experts exchanging arguments which I can decompose into bits I understand.

    You've done this now, at least partially°. Thanks.

    Once I find the time I'll try to read up on

    • NQP
    • Moar
    • Rakudo
    • Lorito
    • Parrot
    • JS's internal model
    to have a better understanding.

    Cheers Rolf
    (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
    Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice

    °) you could also have had a look into the videos and enlighten us how these concepts collide with your POV.

      You can't expect us - the general public - to know the detailed discussions of Perl6's genesis.

      I don't expect that at all. I expect you to be able to understand my argument:

      If feature parity was a milestone (and I expect it was) and speed is a goal (as we have heard), that's at least four and a half years to focus on speed, assuming that the new architecture of Moar only makes speed possible and doesn't confer any measurable speedups on its own. So where are the dramatic speed improvements? What feature or capability that exists in September 2019 justifies all of the churn and drama of the past 8 - 9 years by giving me something usable I didn't have in 2011?

      It's especially interesting to read the comment on Patrick's post that "Rakudo needed NFG support and Parrot refused to provide it", because that's utter nonsense. But I suppose I'm fairly sensitive to opportunity costs and the community costs of not delivering something that's been long promised.

        Again I don't even understand what NFG is.

        Our sub thread started here Re: Ovid's take on the renaming of "Perl6" and was about potential future optimisations.

        You are concentrating in repeating what went wrong in the past and how promises were broken.

        And it seems that I'm the surrogate target for your frustration.

        Well if you need my confirmation that Perl6 is a classic example of bad management:

        Granted!

        • Over optimistic
        • Osborning,
        • drivel heavy,
        • lost in community,
        • marketing desaster,
        • compatibility chaos,
        • etc.

        But you've also been a poster boy of this management group for a decade, and I'm not targeting you with my frustration.

        Let's end it here, ok?

        I'd suggest you ask Ovid directly what he meant with his statement.

        Cheers Rolf
        (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
        Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice

        PS: FWIW I asked Damian in Riga 8 years ago if P6 shouldn't better be renamed "Perl++" to reflect the compatibility issues. And he said probably yes, but it's "already too late."

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://11105312]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others exploiting the Monastery: (8)
As of 2020-10-01 13:18 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    My favourite web site is:












    Results (13 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?