Perl 6 ... dead?

Dear all, for more than 4 years perl 6 is an issue in the perl community ... and it may seem that we have to wait another (at least) 2 years to get a stable perl 6 release. I am a bit worried about the future of perl ... another fading star? The Java hype is gone - people tend to think about c# frameworks - and perl is good for text-processing (thats what I hear quite often) Well right now there are not that many alternative languages regarding flexibily .... I use it as often as I can - Whats your opinion regarding perl and parrot?

Comment on Perl 6 ... dead?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Perl 6 ... dead? (no, just convalescing) by grinder (Bishop) on Sep 01, 2004 at 07:15 UTC
Do not be too quick to bury Perl 6. I would like to draw your attention to Larry Wall's eighth State of the Onion speech. After having read that you will have a better idea of why progress on Perl 6 was as slow as it was last year, and especially that "Perl 6 can be said to be largely complete." and "Perl 6 is going to start emerging this year" (read: 2005) and also "the Parrot engine is in such fine shape, it's time to concentrate on writing a fine Perl 6 compiler to target it". Of course, the events might not pan out like that, but it's... ...not dead yet. I feel happy, I feel happy - another intruder with the mooring of the heat of the Perl	[reply]
Re^2: Perl 6 ... dead? (no, just convalescing) by hartwig (Sexton) on Sep 01, 2004 at 07:58 UTC
Actually I am not quick at all to bury perl 6 - I love to do my programming in perl but in the matter of fact you have to find a job where perl knowledge is required. If you check perl-jobs (in europe) you will find a decline (old cgi stuff, some db most pretty old systems too and text-processing) in the number of jobs. There are currently no new systems which will be designed and implemented in perl. My hope is, that perl 6 will bring some fresh air into software - but as longer it takes as harder it is to do that.	[reply]
Re^3: Perl 6 ... dead? (no, just convalescing) by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Sep 01, 2004 at 12:34 UTC
Most people I know bring Perl with them into a job. Most Fortune 1000 companies don't know that they use Perl as much as they really do. In fact, I'll be that if you ask, many Fortune 1000 companies would think that they don't use Perl at all, when, in fact, they would be dead in the water without it! If you're looking for a Perl-specific job ... good luck. I'm personally going to certify in MySQL and Oracle so that I can always pay the bills. Beyond that, who knows? :-) ------ We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age. Then there are Damian modules.... sigh* ... that's not about being less-lazy -- that's about being on some really good drugs -- you know, there is no spoon.* - flyingmoose I shouldn't have to say this, but any code, unless otherwise stated, is untested	[reply]
Re^3: Perl 6 ... dead? (no, just convalescing) by perrin (Chancellor) on Sep 01, 2004 at 12:38 UTC
What on earth are you talking about? If you check the perl jobs list, you will find that listings are UP, and have been for several months. There are tons of listings for OO programming, mod_perl, and other advanced work with lots of senior positions. I don't know where you got these other ideas either. Java hype fading? Hardly. And what difference does it make to you what happens with Perl 6? Is Perl 5 not working for you somehow? Your post seems very alarmist and your claims of imminent doom have nothing to back them up.	[reply]
Re^3: Perl 6 ... dead? (no, just convalescing) by DaWolf (Curate) on Sep 03, 2004 at 18:35 UTC
I have to agree with hartwig and Wassercrats. The same exact situation (or maybe worst) can be seen here in Brazil. I love Perl and I have high expectations about Perl 6 and Parrot, but things are starting to look scary on the jobs horizon... About dragonchild's post: Most Fortune 1000 companies don't know that they use Perl as much as they really do. In fact, I'll be that if you ask, many Fortune 1000 companies would think that they don't use Perl at all, when, in fact, they would be dead in the water without it! I think one of Perl's major problems is exactly this. Someone should tell these company's this fact, so Perl can be more known, appreciated and respected. Regards, my ($author_nickname, $author_email) = ("DaWolf","erabbott\@terra.com.br") if ($author_name eq "Er Galvão Abbott");	[reply]
Re^2: Perl 6 ... dead? (no, pining for the fjords) by Roy Johnson (Monsignor) on Sep 01, 2004 at 16:31 UTC
He's not dead, he's pining for the fjords! I just thought the dead parrot sketch was a better reference, considering the topic. Caution: Contents may have been coded under pressure.	[reply]
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
Re: Perl 6 ... dead? by hardburn (Abbot) on Sep 01, 2004 at 13:01 UTC
Parrot has been moving along quite well. Perl 5.10 will be based on it. There are certainly things that need to be worked on, but it's mostly working. Personally, I'm more interested in Parrot than Perl6. "There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.	[reply]
Re^2: Perl 6 ... dead? by tilly (Archbishop) on Sep 01, 2004 at 14:53 UTC
My understanding matches AM. Perl 5.10 will not be based on Parrot. Instead, as announced by Larry last year, a normal Perl 5.10 will be released as well as Ponie 5.10 which will run on Parrot. If all goes well, Perl 5.12 may never get released, there will only be Ponie 5.12. If it doesn't go so well, I'd expect parallel Perl 5.12 and Ponie 5.12 releases. (Personally I'd bet on enough people not wanting to move that there will be parallel releases.) Either way though, there is a clear distinction between Perl 5.10 and the version running on Parrot, Ponie 5.10.	[reply]
Re^2: Perl 6 ... dead? by Anonymous Monk on Sep 01, 2004 at 14:26 UTC
> Parrot has been moving along quite well. Perl 5.10 will be based on it. Really? That's not the impression I get from the 5.9 snapshots. It may be that 5.12 will be based on it, but that will be the far future. I don't expect 5.10 to be out this year. If it will be out next year, it's 3 years after 5.8. If it takes another 3 years for 5.12, then we'll see a Perl on Parrot in 2008. That will still be sooner than Perl 6 though.	[reply]
Re^3: Perl 6 ... dead? by hardburn (Abbot) on Sep 01, 2004 at 14:40 UTC
Your post got me to dig around a bit. According to a thread on P5P in mid July, 5.10 will be developed in two versions, one using the old internals and one using Parrot: http://www.mail-archive.com/perl5-porters%40perl.org/msg79665.html "There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.	[reply]
Re: Perl 6 ... dead? by chromatic (Archbishop) on Sep 01, 2004 at 20:09 UTC
Whats your opinion regarding perl and parrot? It was a good idea at the time.	[reply]
Re^2: Perl 6 ... dead? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Sep 01, 2004 at 20:40 UTC
Of the people I've seen or heard complain about Perl 6 in recent memory, none have actually contributed anything useful... Maybe someone should be asking the question: Why are there so few contributers to the project? Examine what is said, not who speaks. "Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham "Think for yourself!" - Abigail "Memory, processor, disk in that order on the hardware side. Algorithm, algorithm, algorithm on the code side." - tachyon	[reply]
Re^3: Perl 6 ... dead? by chromatic (Archbishop) on Sep 01, 2004 at 20:55 UTC
It's an unrewarding and long slog.	[reply]
Re^3: Perl 6 ... dead? by jryan (Vicar) on Sep 01, 2004 at 22:20 UTC
Probably because most of the Perl6 design is done in secret. First the language, and now the compiler. No one contributes because, well, no one really knows what is going on besides the inner cabal. I guess they feel that they can do a better job without the rest of us interfering. I emailed Patrick right after he was announced as compiler pumpking offering to help, and I was told that they want to have a prototype done before they even take it to the list. It doesn't feel very "community-rewrite"-ish or even "open-source"-ish to me. Now, contrast that with parrot...	[reply]
Re^4: Perl 6 ... dead? by chromatic (Archbishop) on Sep 01, 2004 at 22:45 UTC
Re^5: Perl 6 ... dead? by jryan (Vicar) on Sep 02, 2004 at 02:20 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^4: Perl 6 ... dead? by zby (Vicar) on Sep 02, 2004 at 08:43 UTC
Re^5: Perl 6 ... dead? by jryan (Vicar) on Sep 02, 2004 at 17:56 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^4: Perl 6 ... dead? by duff (Parson) on Sep 02, 2004 at 20:46 UTC
Re^5: Perl 6 ... dead? by jryan (Vicar) on Sep 02, 2004 at 21:32 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^2: Perl 6 ... dead? by jryan (Vicar) on Sep 01, 2004 at 22:36 UTC
Documentation? Tests? Remember the disaster with the perl6-documentation list? We couldn't even get basic literals documented due to a lack of any solid information source. Code? Bug Reports? Patrick and Luke are designing and coding off-list and off-cvs. Sure, a lot of the people who complain are just a bunch of whiny jerks. But if you're not interested in parrot itself (the compiler, regex engine, documentation, tests, builtin-functions, core classes and libraries), there really isn't a lot that a non-cabal member can do for Perl6.	[reply]
Re^3: Perl 6 ... dead? by chromatic (Archbishop) on Sep 01, 2004 at 22:56 UTC
Remember the disaster with the perl6-documentation list? I remember it as the "Oh my goodness we have to document absolutely every part of the language starting from the absolute simplest bits and not moving on until we have those things absolutely perfectly complete oh by the way the bungee leader will disappear for three months" list. It helps if you imagine Rocky J. Squirrel responding with "But Bullwinkle, that trick never works!" Perhaps a more charitable lesson to learn is "Don't start a mailing list until people actually do work."	[reply]
Re^4: Perl 6 ... dead? by jryan (Vicar) on Sep 02, 2004 at 02:25 UTC
Re^5: Perl 6 ... dead? by chromatic (Archbishop) on Sep 02, 2004 at 16:30 UTC
Re: Perl 6 ... dead? by talexb (Chancellor) on Sep 01, 2004 at 17:58 UTC
I haven't read any of the other replies, so I may be repeating what others have said. In any case, Perl is not a corporate product with Marketing suits making up flashy ads and chatting up columnists. Perl is a grass roots kind of thing. You almost never hear 'hype' and 'Perl' in the same sentence. Damian Conway came to Toronto and gave a great talk about Perl 6 a few weeks back. He was here two years ago talking about Perl 6, when it was 'eighteen months away'. It's still eighteen months away, but it seems that the extremely bright people working on it have ironed out many of the language problems, and the Parrot team are also making terrific progress. (As Damian said, we didn't make the 'make PHP run faster on Parrot than natively' bet in time for OSCON, but I think it's coming -- how cool is that going to be?) Perl is not a fading star .. I see a long period where Perl 5.6 and 5.8 scripts co-exist with Perl 6 scripts. This funky language that I picked up on a whim in 1998 has now employed me for 6 years; the Perl community continues to grow; local Perl Mongers groups, Perl Monks and YAPC continue to thrive. If you think that Perl os really only good for text processing, then I have to disgree -- that might have been its main strength years and years ago, but it truly is a Swiss Army chainsaw now. Like the Linux kernel and the GNU command line utilities, Perl has CPAN to keep it strong and vibrant. I can't wait for the future .. because the future includes Perl! Alex / talexb / Toronto "Groklaw is the open-source mentality applied to legal research" ~ Linus Torvalds	[reply]
Re^2: Perl 6 ... dead? by hardburn (Abbot) on Sep 01, 2004 at 20:18 UTC
I see a long period where Perl 5.6 and 5.8 scripts co-exist with Perl 6 scripts. Hey, I'm still waiting for Perl4 to go away. Kidding aside, I think we'll see good reasons to write brand new code in Perl5 long after Perl6 is out. I suspect Perl6 won't scale down to simple tasks as well as Perl5 does (though it will almost certainly be better than C++ or Java). Most of the improvements in Perl6 are to get it to scale up better. "There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.	[reply]
Re: Perl 6 ... dead? by perlfan (Vicar) on Sep 01, 2004 at 18:19 UTC
I lurk on the perl6 internals list, and I must say that I have to clear that folder often because of its activity. So what if it takes 1, 2, or even 6 years to get a stable parrot platform. The benefits of such a platform are great enough to wait. Besides, what is the rush? The current Perl is great, and because of the Ponie project, you should not even have to rewrite your Perl 5 wizardry in Perl 6. Parrot is going to be a long term project, and before Perl 6 comes out, Parrot has to be a stable platform. This could take years, and since there is no dire need for the next generation of Perl, I think that we can exercise some patients. May I suggest lurking on the perl6 internals list? With that being said, I am more excited about Parrot than Perl 6 because if it accomplishes its goal, it will usher a whole new era of "write once, run anywhere" like Java was supposed to do... BTW, if anything is dying, it is *BSD ;) .. j/k	[reply]
Re^2: Perl 6 ... dead? by yosefm (Friar) on Sep 01, 2004 at 19:56 UTC
I think that we can exercise some patients. I'm sorry, I don't have any patients that need exercise. I'm not even a doctor :) Ah, If only I had the patience to spend 7-8 years in College... `perl -e'$b=unpack"b",pack"H","59dfce2d6b1664d3b26cd9969503";\ for(;$a<length$b;$a+=9){print+pack"b8",substr$b,$a,8;}'` [download] My public key	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: Perl 6 ... dead? by perlfan (Vicar) on Sep 01, 2004 at 21:01 UTC
I guess only those born "on" 1981 can poke fun at others' spelling mistakes....that must have been one intense labor.	[reply]
Re: Perl 6 ... dead? by MCS (Monk) on Sep 01, 2004 at 16:03 UTC
I think perl is far from dead. I do think it has started to become ubiquitous. I also don't think that java is dead. Oracle is phasing out their client/server architecture and going to a java web based platform.	[reply]
Re: Perl 6 ... dead? by adrianh (Chancellor) on Sep 02, 2004 at 09:29 UTC
Well right now there are not that many alternative languages regarding flexibily How about Python, Ruby, Groovy, Scheme, Lisp, Smalltalk, etc. :-) Whats your opinion regarding perl and parrot? I think Perl 6 will be finished. There are enough talented people with the enthusiasm to see it through. Parrot is nearly at the level to implement everything, and the language design seems to be pretty much as far as it can get without having an implementation to play with. Whether it'll be a success or not I don't know. These things are so hard to predict and depend on many things that have nothing to do with the technical merits of the language. Personally, I think that the thing that will determine Perl's success is how well Parrot succeeds. It's coming in late to the battle between the JVM and the CLR and, to a lesser extent, the various Smalltalk/Lisp VMs. With implementations like Jython and IronPython proving that you can implement dynamic languages reasonably on the JVM/CLR that's going to be a tough fight to win - whatever the technical merits.	[reply]
Re^2: Perl 6 ... dead? by perlfan (Vicar) on Sep 03, 2004 at 14:26 UTC
It's coming in late to the battle between the JVM and the CLR and, to a lesser extent, the various Smalltalk/Lisp VMs. With implementations like Jython and IronPython proving that you can implement dynamic languages reasonably on the JVM/CLR that's going to be a tough fight to win - whatever the technical merits. You forget its financial and platform availability merits - it is free, and should run anywhere Perl5 runs - which is any platform that can run C. BTW, the list is asking for volunteers all the time. Infact, there were 2 calls for help today, and They are always looking for testers.	[reply]
Re^3: Perl 6 ... dead? by adrianh (Chancellor) on Sep 03, 2004 at 20:25 UTC
You forget its financial and platform availability merits - it is free I can get a JVM and a CLR for free (as in beer). I don't see cost as an issue. and should run anywhere* Perl5 runs - which is any platform that can run C* Which is, of course, cool. Unfortunately having many platforms only helps in the commercial world if they are platforms that the commercial world is interested in. The JVM runs on platforms that Perl doesn't run on that just happen to be platforms that commercial folk find attractive. Take mobile phones for example. Nokia will be shipping over 400 million mobile devices with the JVM on this year. Convincing everybody that they should support Parrot too will, I think, be tricky. BTW, the list is asking for volunteers all the time. Infact, there were 2 calls for help today, and They are always looking for testers Some tuits! Some tuits! My kingdom for some tuits! :-) I have the greatest respect for the Parrot and Perl 6 developers. Perl 6 is an interesting language. Parrot is going to be a really great technical platform (I'm really looking forward to implementing Prolog on Parrot when the Spare Time Fairy next visits :-) However, I've seen other interesting languages and great technical platforms fail to get broad acceptance. I just hope Perl 6/Parrot won't join them.	[reply]
Re^4: Perl 6 ... dead? by pdcawley (Hermit) on Sep 05, 2004 at 16:22 UTC
Re^5: Perl 6 ... dead? by adrianh (Chancellor) on Sep 05, 2004 at 17:55 UTC
Re^3: Perl 6 ... dead? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Sep 03, 2004 at 20:54 UTC
Unfortunately, time, willingness and enthusiasm are not enough. Not only must you have these, and C skills, a hi-speed link that doesn't bill you by the minute, you must have a complete understanding of: CVS rsynch diff patch Configure (g)make yacc lexx gcc extensions to standard C. Basically, being a fully paid-up unix system programmer is the base criteria. And that's before you start trying to understand pir, pasm and pick your way through a directory structure that is twice the size it could be because it contains everything including a gob load of stuff that is completly irrelevant to the basic parrot code. Compilers for half a dozen, half completely irrelevant languages amongst other stuff. And woe betide you if you mention that your trying to build parrot on a Win32 system. Examine what is said, not who speaks. "Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham "Think for yourself!" - Abigail "Memory, processor, disk in that order on the hardware side. Algorithm, algorithm, algorithm on the code side." - tachyon	[reply]
Re: Perl 6 ... dead? by mythos (Sexton) on Aug 09, 2007 at 00:55 UTC
I am but a mere initiate just starting my quest for perl wisdom. But I like to think that I am intelligent enough to board a sinking ship. I did a good bit of research before deciding which language to learn. While it may have a smaller share of the hype recently compared to ruby and such. But according to google search numbers, it is surely not dead. Check the graphs.	[reply]
Re: Perl 6 ... dead? by Anonymous Monk on Mar 30, 2014 at 21:25 UTC
If there were any mercy in the world, perl-6 would be dead now. Unfortunately it dragged the rest of Perl with it. We have been having the same conversation for over a decade. Sure perl-6 squeezed out a steaming pile and called in Rakudo Star but it wasn't worth using and then they decided to rewrite it again and again and again. It's funny to read in this thread the argument over documenting LITERALS because even the specification for what might eventually be in 6.0 is still not finished. Both of the Perl programmers remaining in 2024 will be arguing over this stillborn fiasco. Mark my words.	[reply]

Back to Meditations