Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
There's more than one way to do things
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Quantum::Superpositions - ready for production?

by lidden (Curate)
on Sep 28, 2005 at 05:22 UTC ( [id://495631] : note . print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Quantum::Superpositions - ready for production?

TheDamian thinks you should not use it.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Quantum::Superpositions - ready for production?
by aufflick (Deacon) on Sep 29, 2005 at 08:39 UTC
    That's a great node - thanks.

    But Q::S falls into the category of "purpose is to explore and prototype future core language features". That tells me that it's maybe not ideal since a similar but different syntax might be introduced, and also that TheDamian doesn't promise that it is good for production, but that doesn't mean that it is in fact not stable or fast enough for production.

    I do, however, feel appropriately warned.

    As per other comments on that thread, this does again point to the difficulty in sometimes doing a:

    sort {wheat($a) <=> chaff($b)} @CPAN
      The features you're getting in Q::S are part of the core in perl6.
        Ah, so that's why i have been seeing any() and friends in examples here on perlmonks lately.

        Just read through more on Perl 6 - I thought I didn't like it originally, but I think that is just natural resistence to losing -> and changing the way sigils work. The new constructs however are awesome and natural. I love the concept of "fail" and I really love how the Quantum-like operators allow the interpreter to decide that a foreach loop can be run in parallel. How very Perl :)