|
in reply to Hockey Sticks
That's... not exactly what I understand statistics to mean.
Way back in the day when Rakudo had graphs of spec test data every day, Solomon Foster spent a lot of time writing hundreds (thousands?) of tests for complex numerical operations. He put a lot of energy into a thankless task and deserves a lot of credit for that, but the best-kind-of-true fact that "Rakudo passes 10% more tests this month than last!" didn't translate into a Rakudo that was better for most people to use for serious purposes.
Similarly the fact that Niezca passes more tests than Rakudo doesn't necessarily mean that Niezca is more usable or useful or complete than Rakudo. It's not even clear if the tests passed are the right tests or are meaningful to its utility. (Besides, given Rakudo's rewrite-induced regressions, it shouldn't be surprising that another implementation can overtake it.)
Further, if you want to talk about trends and acceleration, you probably need more than a month's worth of data points to do so. You can't get much of a meaningful derivative from a graph with so much noise; you need to normalize it, and you need to normalize it to a normative period. Otherwise, fun with statistics means that we can predict that, based on the spectest measurements of one platform between mid-December 2011 and mid-January 2012, we expect:
- Rakudo to pass 3.7% more of the spectests each month
- The spectest suite test count to grow by 2.1% each month
- Rakudo to mark 2.4% more spectests as TODO each month
- Rakudo to mark 2.4% more spectests as SKIP each month
- Rakudo to run 3.6% more of the spectest suite each month
- Rakudo to fail 7.1% more spectests by count each month
As for:
"the awkward situation with Rakudo Star has helped obscure the fantastic good news in Perl 6."
I hear that other than that, Mary Todd Lincoln rather liked the play.
|
Re^2: Hockey Sticks
by raiph (Deacon) on Jan 17, 2012 at 08:03 UTC
|
chromatic,
You've said before that, despite their protestations to the contrary, the Rakudo team doesn't deliver what they say they're going to deliver. And that, as a result, you've experienced professional embarrassment and commercial/career loss. And all of that is on top of your feelings about Parrot, and your involvement in it, and the amazing 12-years-and-counting Perl 6 saga.
I get all that, and that you are the Modern Perl (5) champion. (Thankyou.) I see why you might currently feel the need to play the role of skeptic in relation to Perl 6.
Although I see your current need, I also see the future you, the one that will need to rebuild your bridges with Perl 6. You do NOT want to dig yourself an anti Perl 6 hole out of all proportion to what's justified. Perl 6 is progressing nicely. Perl 6.0.0 compilers will ship. Why are you so determined to throw away all the goodwill you built up before your disappointment?
Late, fat, and ugly
"There comes a time when the only merciful thing to do is pull the plug...
Even Perl 6's most ardent supporters have to admit the possibility that their brand new language now more resembles a massive, festering cyst. Trapped in the womb for well over a decade, the Perl 6 Project has made a lot of noise, churned out a lot of code and has gone almost exactly nowhere. Late, fat and ugly, Perl 6 is hopelessly moribund, deeply mired in its own filth, with no end in sight. A quick and painless euthanasia is the best option for all concerned.
As usual, the blame can be placed on the lack of responsible adult supervision. Told to create a utopia, the Perl 6 Project's programmers have done almost exactly the opposite, letting their far-thinking vision overwhelm such tedious, day-to-day tasks as actually getting a usable product out the door.
Oblivious to the fact that their market share was disappearing faster than donuts in the break room, the Perl 6 Project programmers repeatedly abandoned real-world progress and accomplishments for -- and this is the technical term -- cool shit.
With the sort of over-enthusiastic zeal that used to get missionaries attached to roasting spits, the Project couldn't satisfy itself with merely building a fast, efficient, CPAN compatible compiler. Instead, it set off on a quest to re-engineer the way Perl applications are built, to construct not just a new compiler, but the ultimate Perl, a be-all, end-all, goes-ping monster."
(From
Late, fat and ugly, with some minor editing.) | [reply] |
|
|
Perl 6.0.0 compilers will ship.
I've never claimed otherwise.
You do NOT want to dig yourself an anti Perl 6 hole out of all proportion to what's justified.
Thank you for the (I'm sure) well-intentioned advice on how to make you feel warm and fuzzy, but I believe you're operating from some very wrong assumptions.
I'd like to use Perl 6, but the lack of usable and stable releases since the initial Rakudo Star announcement make it very unattractive. I have neither the time or energy to continue to devote to making that happen. Volunteers will work on what volunteers want to work on, and if they want to do only the fun things, so be it.
I see why you might currently feel the need to play the role of skeptic in relation to Perl 6. Why are you so determined to throw away all the goodwill you built up before your disappointment?
Why do people on #perl6 spend so much time performing long-distance psychoanalysis and so little time reading words as written? ("Professional embarrassment"? Really?)
| [reply] |
|
|
I have neither the time or energy to continue to devote to making a usable Perl 6 happen.
And yet you have the time and energy to complain, at length, repeating the same points, even when you've seen reasonable rebuttals supported by irrefutable evidence?
Volunteers will work on what volunteers want to work on, and if they want to do only the fun things, so be it.
You're repeating an accusation that has been repeatedly denied, with clear evidence to back up those denials.
It seems you did not understand why I inserted the "Late, fat, and ugly" piece above. I'll grant it was subtle. Please click the link if you wish to put things in perspective.
"Professional embarrassment"? Really?
You tell me. What is going on for you? I thought you claimed you persuaded others to start building a business product based on Perl 6 earlier than your partners thought wise:
"the bitter irony that said partner wasn't even keen on starting the project, as I am the only one among us who but the opportunity cost of watching and waiting was minimal." (from Waiting for a Product, not a Compiler)
So I thought your current perspective would therefore naturally be something akin to professional embarrassment.
| [reply] |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
