Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl-Sensitive Sunglasses
 
PerlMonks  

Re: If Perl 5 were to become Perl 7, what (backward-compatible) features would you want to see?

by Lotus1 (Vicar)
on Oct 21, 2019 at 19:21 UTC ( #11107781=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to If Perl 5 were to become Perl 7, what (backward-compatible) features would you want to see?

haukex wrote:

I imagine that, similar to Perl 6, a Perl 7 binary might be called perl7, with files being called .p7 or .pl7, .pm7, etc. Using this interpreter or this file extension would be the same as a use v7; (and turn on the corresponding feature bundle, etc.).

Changing the file extension because of Perl 6 Raku doesn't make sense to me. We currently can run multiple versions of Perl 5 Perl ( :) ) on a single machine with existing methods so why not continue with this approach?

The Python community navigated the 2.x to 3.x transition without changing the extension. They ended up changing the extensions after version 3.5 for reasons I don't know or care about, but they didn't put the version name into the extension. There are a lot of simple Python 2.7 programs that will run in 3.3. If the argument is that the 5 has become part of the language name then let's change it back to just Perl.

Another example is the C language. There are dialects such as Cyclone that have different extensions but the .c extension is still used for the C language.

  • Comment on Re: If Perl 5 were to become Perl 7, what (backward-compatible) features would you want to see?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: If Perl 5 were to become Perl 7, what (backward-compatible) features would you want to see?
by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Oct 21, 2019 at 19:56 UTC

    From my admittedly limited experience with Python, the 2–3 change was a bit of a nightmare—and a major surprise coming from a community that is so culturally smug about their language—and any crutches or buoys might have been a help.

      "with Python, the 2–3 change was a bit of a nightmare"

      As someone who personally worked in an organization that dealt with Python, including while trying to deal with 2-3 change, it is/was more than a nightmare.

      I was in a job interview just this week where my interviewer stated "you dealt with Python 2-3 phase? That's crazy, we're still dealing with it now". That was beyond the silly parens after a print statement.

      Everything is so fast to change nowadays, nothing seems relevant. Perl 19, Python 86, C 4016, quarterly profits, not seeing long term, do what's coming out of 'college'... things seem to be speeding up to achieve the inevitability of futile.

      Interesting watching it happen, it has been.

        stevieb wrote:

        I was in a job interview just this week where my interviewer stated "you dealt with Python 2-3 phase? That's crazy, we're still dealing with it now". That was beyond the silly parens after a print statement.

        I was at my job a few weeks ago working on a project where I'm the expert on scripting bulk changes in a certain modeling software when a non-programming project manager asked me if Perl is obsolete and why don't I use Python. The upgrade must not have done all that much damage to Python.

      How has the Python 2 to 3 transition been compared to the Perl to Raku experience? More of a nightmare for me since I've never had to deal with Raku.

      With Raku using a different file extension it makes it easier to run both Perl and Raku on the same machine. But if updating Perl to version 7 means that we need to change Perl script file extensions and all the automated installs, environment variables, scheduled tasks, etc. that seems like a hassle. I don't see what the advantage is. The '.pl' extension is very well known. What if there is another application that uses '.p9' already? What happens when we get to '.p99'? Ok, that last question is a little tongue in cheek (meaning, not serious, with a wink and a grin). I don't think I'll be around to see Perl version 99 but you never know. It's just my two cents worth and I am not attacking Perl.

      How poorly the Python upgrade has gone is irrelevant since they didn't change the file extension. If they had I suspect the upgrade would have been worse in the long run. Easier in the short term maybe. Giving up '.pl' seems like giving up the brand. In the *nix world I suppose it is irrelevant since they don't need to bother with extensions. Just set it as executable and put in the shebang and go.

      Edit: typos.

        Yeah. Dunno. For my part I have never used the .pl except where it’s a convention already in a given codebase. chmod +x is all I do. File extensions tell lies easily.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://11107781]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others examining the Monastery: (3)
As of 2021-01-25 01:54 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    Notices?