I sporadically follow discussions on lambda (I'm not a PHD but I play one on TV) and while Parrot seems to be *legitimate* in the minds of most lambdaheads Perl6 is openly sneered at.
Perl6 is a kitchen sink language and lack[s] elegance or conceptual consistency and there is some really ugly stuff planned for Perl6. It probably doesn't matter because the language spec is so complex it would be a wonder if it is ever fully implemented (I'm sure Autrijus would concur with that - given his slow progress to date). But all is not bleak with Perl6 design because [o]ccasionally it stumbles across a good idea, in the same way that a construction worker might unearth a fossil when drives his pickaxe through it. Ok not exactly a rave but I guess if we trim a bit of context then we might get a good review:
Perl6 has "[snip][snip][snip][snip][snip][snip][snip][snip][snip][snip][snip][snip]good idea[s] [snip][snip][snip][snip][snip][snip][snip][snip]".
Score one for @Larry.
The flaws in Perl6 design (they aren't really pointed out beyond broad generalities but I'm sure it must be flawed) are most likely due to @Larry's alcohol issues - being a responsible Canadian I've already called every bar, restaurant, licqour|beer store in the greater GTA so there will be no alcohol served to @Larry during YAPC - I REFUSE TO BE AN ENABLER - no more drunken meanderings for @Larry.
I've also started a collection to send @Larry[0] to Lourdes in order to cure his vision issues - no longer will Perl 6 design docs be equated to a blind man's account of constructing a puzzle. PRAISE THE LORD and pass the compiler!
I have a solution to Perl6's image issues. I think everything can be solved with a strategic renaming. Perhaps if the 1.0 press release reads: "After years of effort we are pleased to release version 1.0 of ........... ARC", then like CSN&Y and an entire birkenstock-wearing, barbershop-fearing, and recreational-drug-using generation we would be golden. Or we can change Larry's name to Larry von Wall. Whatever.
Anyway ... keep up the good work everyone and maybe one day Frank Atanassow will finally say: "Perl6? You know what it almost is an improvement on sh" or at least "Perl6? At least it's not Perl5".
References
but going against the mainstream often makes people mistake insight and truth for anger. His comment:
"perhaps Perl's biggest advantage is in having libraries for the most obscure tasks.
Yes, that is my point. It's biggest advantage has nothing to do with the language itself, but rather the social/historical context. And that context could as easily have been/be established for Haskell, if people (had) want(ed) it to be that way.
(I'm sorry but I really need to get this off my chest, again:) Scripting languages thrive on hype because they have no other advantage; their advantage is the hype, and the popularity which accompanies it. Sure, Perl may be an improvement on sh (frankly, I am not so sure
:) but it is hard to find a strawer man. (Man, what the hell kind of marketing campaign is that? "Perl: Better than sh!"??? How about, "Bush: Better than Osama!" or "Spam: Better than starving!" Then again, spam is considered a delicacy in certain countries...) Consider Scheme: Scheme has been—for, what, fifteen years now?—superior to extant scripting languages in nearly every way as a programming language, and continues to be so, even though it has changed only a little, but no one wants to use it, simply because it isn't popular. Scheme was a great language, even when Perl was still a glimmer in Larry Wall's eye. But, no, we can't use Scheme for scripting tasks, right, because it was already invented, and moreover by academics, and it has far too many parentheses. Instead, we need a new language like Perl, which is based on sound principles like DWIM, TMTOWTDI and Mr. Wall's personal theory of natural linguistics. Brilliant. Most programmers don't want better tools as much as they want self-validation and a veneer of novelty. Inasmuch as library size is a measure of popularity, it doesn't reflect on the usefulness of the language itself. "
This contains quite a lot of truth, particularly in the social/historical context of perl and CPAN. Seeing how one module installation tends to suck in half of CPAN at a whack these days, even that may be eroding. Why do people sneer at Perl6? Probably for a lot of reasons, but I believe a big reason is because those who talk most about 'community' have the attitude that approximates to 'we don't care if people leave as we will build perl6 and more will appear as if by magic.' And they haven't and it's unlikely that they will. Aside from the rot from within, unanswered questions also plague P6 as those who might have been interested but are too jaded to care.
I'm not familar with Atanassow, but he seems to be paying more attention and understanding a lot more than those who perhaps should.
Re:Atanassow might be cranky
milardj on 2005-05-13T19:06:59
I don't think Frank et al are sneering at Perl6 because @Larry are taking a 'we don't care if people leave as we will build perl6 and more will appear as if by magic.' attitude. That seems to be your issue. Frank is sneering because Perl does not measure up to his ideals. It is no different then some literary writers sneering at mass-market or genre writers while bemoaning that the stupid unwashed masses don't recognize their genius (while conveniently forgetting that Shakespeare and Dickens were in fact mass market entertainment).It's that attitude that drives me nuts. Amongst my many (brief) majors I majored in English. Take Frank, throw on a blazer with elbow patches, throw him in the English department and he would write a 10,000 word analysis of Catch 22 (althought that probably sold too many copies to be any good) but be unable to name his favourite part.
What Frank (and Frank at this point is just some composite) doesn't realize is that in general people don't give a shit about the "elegance" and "conceptual purity" of the tools they use. They just want tools that will let them do their job more effectively. For me Perl meets that criteria for many problem domains and Perl 6 will scale with me as I move into other areas.
Would lisp do the same or better? Sure. Haskell? I think Autrijus has shown all of us how productive and elegant Haskell is.
What do you not like about Perl 6? Simon has long complained about the size of the core. Abigail has pretty much dismissed Perl 6 because of significant whitespace. What is your beef? Aside from more transperancy in funding (I assume you are alluding to the funding thread from a while ago with some of your comments) what don't you like about Perl 6?
If your issue is that you don't like @Larry's decisions then I'll be the one to say: you don't have to. Maybe Perl 6 won't get your mind share - maybe Ruby or Python will fit you better. Or maybe you will stick with Perl 5. It's only a tool. Use the one that works for you. If you give it a chance (and you can give it a chance right now thanks to lamdacamels - and when I knock lamda the ultimate I am knocking a certain attitude that is not shared by all - my thanks to shapr and others who have been working on PUGS) maybe you'll find that the tool really has improved.
