Re^3: Perl is dead


good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW
	PerlMonks

Re^3: Perl is dead

by dpuu (Chaplain)

on Oct 22, 2007 at 20:27 UTC ( #646568=note: print w/replies, xml )

Need Help??

in reply to Re^2: Perl is dead
in thread Perl is dead

If we've answered all the questions that relate to the base language then that means that the base language is indeed dead. Just as the science of physics was "dead" at the end of of nineteenth century. Then something new comes along -- be it relativity, quantum physics, Perl 5.10, 5.12, or 6.0 -- and the new features stimulate new ideas, new idioms, and new discussions. If the resurrection has been successful the these ideas act as the catalyst for still more ideas (i.e. we shouldn't need a subsequent kick-starts).

--Dave
Opinions my own; statements of fact may be in error.

Comment on Re^3: Perl is dead

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^4: Perl is dead
by Jenda (Abbot) on Oct 24, 2007 at 22:38 UTC

I would not call something that doesn't make the headlines anymore "dead". You speak about things that are new (or those you hate), you don't speak about things you use every day. And the number of questions often depends more on the quality and availability of the documentation, than the quality and usefullness of something. The worse the docs, the more confusing the interface, the more questions.

Jenda
Support Denmark!
Defend the free world!

[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion