Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
go ahead... be a heretic
 
PerlMonks  

Re^9: Ovid's take on the renaming of "Perl6"

by chromatic (Archbishop)
on Sep 02, 2019 at 15:54 UTC ( #11105450=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^8: Ovid's take on the renaming of "Perl6"
in thread Ovid's take on the renaming of "Perl6"

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.

  • Comment on Re^9: Ovid's take on the renaming of "Perl6"

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^10: Ovid's take on the renaming of "Perl6"
by LanX (Cardinal) on Sep 02, 2019 at 17:04 UTC
    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."

      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.

      Yes. Exactly.

      But you've also been a poster boy of this management group for a decade.

      Sure. That's why I stopped. After 10 years of evidence that promises would be broken, I stopped believing the people who made those promises over and over again.

      Why should I believe them now, after another 8 years of broken promises?

        It's not about believing but having a scientifically sound (hence productive) discussion.

        Jonathan shows stuff in this video, you can watch it and share your opinion.

        Where we agree: Perl5 should certainly not count on Perl6 to save the day.

        > I stopped believing the people who made those promises over and over again.

        Well you were one of the promise makers and I believed them.

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

      Damian … said it's "already too late."

      I agree. I have no clear idea how a rename will help anyone at this point unless the porters decide to release the next update as Perl 7 the same time the rename happens. But still, without some significant marketing dollars spread around—and maybe an extremely good app or two—it will harm more than help. There will be no differentiator in the release, unless signatures and some OO become bombproof, non-experimental core. The widespread, entrenched hatred for Perl 5 will commute directly to Perl 7 with newly strengthened critiques: look at this mess, it hasn’t changed, it’s just a trick, the upgrade cycle will kill everyone’s apps, as if Perl had any apps, compatibility is impossible with a double version jump, talk about your backpedalling! et cetera, et cetera.

      And FTR I still disagree, strongly, that Perl 6 hurt Perl 5 particularly or in the grand scheme. Perl 5 was circling the drain *beforehand*. That was the entire genesis. Perl 6 caused some confusion but less division of effort than claimed and it brought back-ported improvements and renewed interest. Without that, I don’t know that Perl 5 wouldn’t be in worse shape today.

        I agree. I have no clear idea how a rename will help anyone at this point unless the porters decide to release the next update as Perl 7 the same time the rename happens.

        I'm giving up on trying to predict the future.

        I'm a fan of clean names that avoid confusion. Perl++ would be an accurate description of the intent and draw a direct analog to C++.

        How a backwards compatible successor to Perl5 should be named ... no idea. Maybe leaping to 10 like Autocad did?

        But I agree that this must be accompanied with clear improvements like signatures (and/or an OO System).

        Anything else would be quickly ridiculed as marketing gag.

        > that Perl 6 hurt Perl 5 particularly or in the grand scheme.

        I claim Osborning, AFAIK Perl5 releases in the 200x years were rare because everybody was expecting Perl6 to arrive. That's a normal psychological effect.

        And when Perl6 was officially released I personally witnessed the aftermath of a very strange and loud discussion of my clients to switch as soon as possible to the "newer version".

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

        PS: FWIW: you may want to watch my talk about "The Camel Paradox" (not sure if slides and sound are out of sync or if I was in Muppet mode again ;-)

        And FTR I still disagree, strongly, that Perl 6 hurt Perl 5 particularly or in the grand scheme. Perl 5 was circling the drain *beforehand*. That was the entire genesis.

        At the time it seemed like we were being sold a new car just to fix a flat tire. I'm not faulting a language designer for preferring to design languages than to maintain and evolve them. Imagine if all the energy that went into apocalyptic criticism of Perl 5 was instead a rewrite (or mere tweaks) of mod_perl and a few more core modules so it could meet the competitive challenges.

        https://www.perl6.org/archive/doc/apocalypse.html
        

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://11105450]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others perusing the Monastery: (8)
As of 2020-09-29 11:12 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    If at first I don’t succeed, I …










    Results (146 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?