http://perl6.org
I cannot tell you how painful it was to go to that site. Camelia? A buttefly?! WTF!
All the talk about modern Perl and nice looking web sites for Perl was lost on somebody apparently.
I think the butterfly by itself is fine, and could be incorporated into a decent site design. However, the site as it stands is an absolutely horrible combination of over-saturated colors. I literally can't look at it because it hurts my eyes (not figuratively, it actually is painful).
Re:It's not the butterfly
sigzero on 2009-08-29T15:49:15
I can't look at the butterfly either...it induces seizures.
Re:It's not the butterfly
Alias on 2009-08-31T06:27:33
The butterfly is about as professional as something my niece makes in her art class in the 5th grade.
Re:It's not the butterfly
Aristotle on 2009-08-31T07:36:54
So I’m not the only one? I cringe every time I see it.
:-( Re:It's not the butterfly
ank on 2009-08-31T16:09:57
Please take a look at this thread and tell me I'm not dreaming. Couldn't they just spend $100 on a professional? How could they manage to make a butterfly ugly?
Re:It's not the butterfly
petdance on 2009-08-31T17:21:46
Instead of relying on "they" to spend $100 to do a logo, how about you take your understanding of the design intent and spend the $100 to get a logo made? It would a fantastic help.Re:It's not the butterfly
stu42j on 2009-09-01T14:40:47
I think if the Perl Foundation were to start a "Fund Drive" for this, they'd have the money quickly.
Re:It's not the butterfly
ank on 2009-08-31T16:11:49
Compare with something like this.
First idea: put a fractal on its back. That would have been kick-ass. Damn, I might even steal that idea for my own stuff.
How do you manage to screw things up so bad? Geez.
The source code for the site is available. Commit access is easy to get. If you have a better design, nothing stands in the way of your improvements.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-30T11:21:32
About ten years of lost progress stand in the way of improvements. Need I list the number of programming languages that came and went in that time?
Thankfully I am not paying for any of the group developing perl 6, I would be pretty annoyed if that were the case.
I can fix the webpage, sure. I cannot, however, fix the last 10 years of perl 6 debacle.
Re:Fix It!
pmichaud on 2009-08-30T16:37:11
About ten years of lost progress stand in the way of improvements.
Are you really meaning to imply that there has been no progress on Perl (5 or 6) for the last ten years?
Need I list the number of programming languages that came and went in that time?
Yes, I think that would be very useful to me.
Pm
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-30T18:44:07
I'm not implying, I'm saying that perl 6 is to perl what "heaven's gate" was to Michael Cimino's directorial career.
Perl 5 is great, but the sheer amount of resources that have been put into vapourwareperl6 is mind-boggling. And *please* don't point me to some project saying "you can use it now" because you *know* perl 6 is not production quality.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-30T18:55:04
To clarify: There has been a little bit of progress on perl 5, namely perl 5.10. Perl 6 is a disaster, a train-wreck, a lot of sweat (including mine) lost forever in a project that should have been finished 8 years ago.Re:Fix It!
Aristotle on 2009-08-30T20:04:03
Yet here you are, wasting even more time, and in an ignoble effort to boot, namely, devaluing the sweat of the people who have come after you – not to mention that you’re exposing yourself to the risk of having to eat your words. Hopefully you’re at least enjoying it?
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T01:58:01
You really don't believe that the perl 6 effort has set us back?Re:Fix It!
Aristotle on 2009-08-31T06:05:39
I’d the last person on Earth to claim that Perl 6 has been smooth sailing.
But are you certain about which is the symptom and which is the disease?
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T06:24:42
No, of course I'm not certain! I don't think anyone can be.
But did it have to become a research effort? I love computer science, but isn't it better to just release early and often?
I love lots of the ideas in perl 6, but come on, do we need all that cruft at the same time in one mega package? "It'll be done for Christmas" give me a break, it's embarrassing.
I would start with data structures, then objects, etc. Try to target the JVM at first. Baby steps in technology, giant leaps in delivery. Maybe even re-do the RFC process and stage it. I don't know. Maybe I have a 20/20 hindsight now.
Re:Fix It!
chromatic on 2009-08-31T06:39:17
But did it have to become a research effort?
How is it a research effort any more than any other language? Long-term sustainability is a research project. So is cross-domain applicability.
... isn't it better to just release early and often? Rakudo's had monthly releases since its inception. How much earlier or more often would you like?
Try to target the JVM at first.
Good luck. You'll get lost in a maze of trampolines trying to implement laziness for data structures. Non-linear control flow will make you reinvent a fair amount of Parrot or SMOP. If you can get multidispatch working in a way that the JVM can have any hope of optimizing, I'll buy you the beverage of your choice.
Maybe I have a 20/20 hindsight now.
It does read a little bit like you're telling Edison he should have started with a carbon filament in a vacuum.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T16:30:17
1. You said it yourself before; that it was very hard to accomplish because such a thing had never been done yada yada yada.
2. Don't play dumb. I mean release something that's a bit of an improvement on perl 5 and go on there instead of trying to do all at once.
3. I know several languages that target the JVM and I have written one compiler for a FORTH-like language that targets the JVM myself. It's difficult, it's slow, but it was done by 1-2 man teams many times in the period in which perl has been sleeping.
Also, who says it has to have all those features? I guess it's only because you are having fun and getting paid for it.
Which brings me to a final point: I am not getting paid to try to open your eyes. It's difficult for me to catch up and reply properly. And also, I think it's quite useless for me to keep chattering away since my opinion seems insulting to you and your friends.
-- ank
Re:Fix It!
Aristotle on 2009-08-31T07:14:47
But did it have to become a research effort?
Apparently. Remember the mugs? It wasn’t exactly like Perl 5 was in the most dynamic place of its lifetime. In fact, the innovation rate in both projects seems to be linked (though not directly coupled).
“It’ll be done for Christmas” give me a break, it’s embarrassing.
Thankfully we finally know which Christmas.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T07:50:05
Really? Which one?Re:Fix It!
Aristotle on 2009-08-31T08:08:05
2010.
Re:Fix It!
chromatic on 2009-08-30T20:33:06
... a project that should have been finished 8 years ago. How in the world would you have possibly finished Perl 6 eight years ago, with the resources available eight years ago, the volunteer effort available eight years ago, and the knowledge of Perl 6 available eight years ago?
How long should it take to invent a lexically overrideable, self-hosting grammar engine and build a complete, coherent, consistent language around that? If you're doing that in 2001, you don't have the advantage of hindsight and hard-won experience from multiple implementations. You don't even have Apocalypse 5 or specification tests.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T01:55:50
By reducing the scope drastically. Perl 6has been so extremely over-scoped from the beginning it's insane.Re:Fix It!
chromatic on 2009-08-31T09:04:04
Perl 6 has been so extremely over-scoped from the beginning it's insane.
That's certainly not how I remember things. I remember working groups and RFCs and a short review period and then, some 360 flaws in Perl 5 later, everyone slowly realizing that a consistent, coherent, effective reinvention of Perl qua Perl 6 couldn't occur even in design in six to nine months.
Even so, the modest reorganization of Python 2 into Python 3 took eight and a half years.
Re:Fix It!
petdance on 2009-08-31T22:07:25
By reducing the scope drastically. Perl 6has been so extremely over-scoped from the beginning it's insane.But then it wouldn't have been what Larry wanted for Perl 6.
Re:Fix It!
pmichaud on 2009-08-30T23:50:27
To clarify: There has been a little bit of progress on perl 5, namely perl 5.10.
Somehow I don't believe that Moose, DBIx::Class, Catalyst, etc. reasonably qualify as "a little bit of progress". I think they represent significant advancements. (And if I'm not mistaken, many of the ideas in Moose directly stem from concepts coming out of the design and implementation of Perl 6.)
I also notice you have thus far not listed "any of the programming languages that have come and gone in [the past ten years]", per your original reply. I'm really curious to know what these are.
Pm
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T01:54:22
I was not clear enough. I am a big fan of Moose, etc and did not want to belittle what perl 5 is. I just wanted to point out that, by wasting so much time with Perl 6, we lost a lot of work that could have gone to perl 5.Re:Fix It!
Alias on 2009-09-02T01:23:06
That's a false choice, it assumes that volunteer time is fungible and people will work on whatever they are told to.
The reality is that the TYPE of work greatly influences the volume of contribution.
Re:Fix It!
autarch on 2009-08-31T03:26:01
You are not mistaken. Moose draws on Perl 6 (and/or Perl 6's influences) for much of its feature set.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-09-02T09:17:42
I don't want to dismiss the originality of the perl 6 effort outright; but I have the feeling that Perl 6's influences are the proverbial shoulders of giants.
It's a moot point anyway, because noone can know for a fact what would have happened to perl 5 without Perl 6.
Re:Fix It!
cjfields on 2009-08-31T01:05:34
Let's not feed the trolls. I don't think any amount of convincing will work with ank, judging by his past comments (pretty much flame-bait with nothing positive to say).
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T01:58:49
Sad that's all you can say of me.Re:Fix It!
cjfields on 2009-08-31T02:10:10
Your words speak volumes enough. I could care less what you think.Re:Fix It!
autarch on 2009-08-31T03:27:02
If you _could_ care less, that means you _do_ care. I think you _couldn't_ care less
;) Re:Fix It!
cjfields on 2009-08-31T04:32:21
Yes, precisely. Grammar aren't my strong point;) Re:Fix It!
petdance on 2009-08-31T15:06:47
a project that should have been finished 8 years ago.On what do you base that timeline? Anything other than "That's what I would have liked?"
Re:Fix It!
murr on 2009-08-31T19:07:22
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.bootstrap/2000/08/msg1185.htmlhttp://fr.linuxtoday.org/infrastructure/2000073101706NWCYSW
http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=204115
9 years later, Perl 6 has release managers engaging in casuistics over what "stable" and "done" mean instead of committing to an actual release date.
Re:Fix It!
chromatic on 2009-08-31T19:20:45
... instead of committing to an actual release date. If you know how to predict the availability, interest, and productivity of volunteers in a community-driven project, please review the Rakudo and Parrot milestone plans. I'm very interested in your answer to my (oft-repeated) question of how long it should take.
... what "stable" and "done" mean... I suspect you won't get consistent definitions for those from anywhere in software development.
Re:Fix It!
petdance on 2009-08-31T22:06:16
Now I see the problem. You're conflating estimates from past project leaders with what "should" happen. This is an easy discrepancy to solve: Those past estimates were terribly wrong. Don't carry on the expectation that those estimates were correct or reasonable.casuistics over what "stable" and "done" mean instead of committing to an actual release date.
If you can't define what "stable" and "done" are, then how can you expect an actual release date?
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T03:11:27
As for the languages, just off the top of my head: digitalmars D, factor, ruby, python 3000, about a half dozen JVM-targetting langs, etc. They are not standing still. Neither should we.Re:Fix It!
spinclad on 2009-08-31T05:49:53
(ruby came and *went*??)Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T06:01:14
Of course it didn't "go" - no language really "goes" in a strict sense; but think about them as waves of interest in different languages, that's what I was thinking about when I wrote the original post.Re:Fix It!
chromatic on 2009-08-31T06:23:56
Walter Bright started D in 1999. The first public release of Ruby occurred in 1995. Guido announced Python 3000 in spring 2000, several months before the summer 2000 announcement of Perl 6 (unless you count Topaz, which doesn't count). Clojure may or may not count, being a Lisp dialect. Scala counts if you throw out Odersky's work on its predecessor in 1999.
Factor (and by extension and influence, Joy) indeed count.
The most popular of those languages is Ruby, however.
Re:Fix It!
teilo on 2009-08-31T16:35:50
You do realize that Python 3000 = Python 3.x, which was only just left beta a few months back, and is only just picking up steam?Re:Fix It!
petdance on 2009-08-31T00:24:14
I cannot, however, fix the last 10 years of perl 6 debacle.So do you have anything useful to say, or are you just saying "GODDAMN THAT SUCKS WAH WAH WAH YOU ALL ARE DOODOOHEADS FOR WORKING ON IT," because really that's about all I'm seeing.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T02:09:02
Let me spell it out for you: drop this insane perl 6 thing immediately. Give us good, stable threading in perl 5 instead of self-hosting grammars in perl 6. Et cetera. We are your user base. Or used to be...
- ankRe:Fix It!
petdance on 2009-08-31T02:14:58
drop this insane perl 6 thing immediately. Give us good, stable threading in perl 5 instead of self-hosting grammars in perl 6.See, now that's something we can address, if a bit obnoxious.
Here's what you're missing: Perl 6 and "good stable threading in perl 5" are not mutually exclusive. It's not as if the people working on Perl 6 would necessarily working on your pet projects. Fact is, Perl 6 is not at all a distraction from Perl 5. If anything, it's feeding Perl 5.
If you want improved threading in Perl 5, there are a number of ways to get it, but bashing Perl 6 isn't the answer.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T03:08:34
Let me insist: trying to build Perl 6 is less useful to real, practical perl than actually working on Perl 5. If you think proper OO syntax, multithreading, better speed, etc are "pet projects" of mine, then we really have nothing more to discuss, since I believe those are major issues in perl 5 that should have priority over perl 6 work. You can't expect me to believe that the perl 6 team can't work on that.
Also, I think the point which is lost is that the users aren't clamoring for a "lexically overrideable, self-hosting grammar engine."
How about a good installation for windows? Put some resources on Strawberry Perl, that's a really awesome effort. By doing these small things, the nice and crazy computer science-ey features we all like to work on will evolve, a-la CPAN, using the community instead of some 10+ year project.
Re:Fix It!
petdance on 2009-08-31T03:23:54
Let me insist: trying to build Perl 6 is less useful to real, practical perl than actually working on Perl 5.Let me write that more correctly for you:
trying to build Perl 6 is less useful to me than actually working on Perl 5.
Everyone's got different itches to scratch. It's all a matter of who's doing the scratching.
You can't expect me to believe that the perl 6 team can't work on that.
I don't think that you understand how open source projects work.
People are not assigned to work on certain projects. The people who work on Perl 6 are working on Perl 6 because they are interested in Perl 6. There's no reason to think that those working on Perl 6 would want to work on threading in Perl 5.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T03:40:47
Rewrite all you want, that doesn't make it true.
Re:Fix It!
petdance on 2009-08-31T03:46:46
You're stating your opinion. Opinions are neither true nor false. You find X to be more important than Y. Others disagree. That's how it goes.The tragedy here is that you're trying to convince people to work on your concerns by bashing the work of others. I can guarantee you it won't work.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T04:10:21
If there's anything I really want or need, I can work on it, or start my own project. All I'm trying to do is send a message, after many years of contemplation. Again, I am not alone, and the issues I mentioned are real and don't affect just myself.
I know it's hard to accept, but since the RFCs, perl 6 has pretty much been a lost cause. Also, I don't value someone's work just because someone sweats or holds weekly meetings. There's only three things I care for: delivery, delivery, delivery.
You have lost touch with reality. That's what I'm trying to say. I'm not alone in this, and I couldn't care less as to what you think is an opinion and what isn't. Nor will I be dragged into a philosophical argument.
If anything, I'm a bit too blunt, but that's the way I am.
Re:Fix It!
petdance on 2009-08-31T04:16:18
If anything, I'm a bit too blunt, but that's the way I am.How's that workin' out for you, as far as bringing people around to your way of thinking?
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T04:30:47
Oh, I see what you did there - ignored the whole point. Well done!Re:Fix It!
jdavidb on 2009-09-10T16:21:22
Again, I am not alone, and the issues I mentioned are real and don't affect just myself.
And the people you are talking to don't care. They have their goals set. They are not interested in your goals. Period.
Also, I don't value someone's work just because someone sweats or holds weekly meetings.
Noone expects you to. You are not their userbase.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-09-12T01:05:22
If you can't even see the problem - or even understand who the user base is - you are definitely part of the problem. Watch perl slide off the top 10 languages and tell me you don't care. Please, go ahead.
-- ankRe:Fix It!
jdavidb on 2009-09-14T23:02:51
No, I'm not part of the problem. I'm just some guy. I have no obligation at all to fix the Perl community or to make it work how you want, and I'm probably unqualified to do so. I'm as much a "part of the problem" as my three year old son is. I am completely uninvolved, other than commenting on this web forum. I'm just trying to assist you in clarifying what the people you are talking to in thinking. If you don't like my assistance, you can have a complete refund.
:) Re:Fix It!
jdavidb on 2009-09-14T23:03:53
And the people you are talking to don't care. They have their goals set. They are not interested in your goals. Period.
Don't read more into this than what it says. I didn't say these people SHOULD be this way. I said they ARE this way.
If you want to read more into that, then you're the problem, I think.
Re:Fix It!
jdavidb on 2009-09-10T16:19:32
You seem to be postulating an objective standard for something that is completely subjective.
Re:Fix It!
pmichaud on 2009-08-31T04:41:11
...since I believe those are major issues in perl 5 that should have priority over perl 6 work. You can't expect me to believe that the perl 6 team can't work on that. You seem to be operating from an assumption that most of us working on Perl 6 would instead be spending our time and energy on Perl 5 if Perl 6 didn't exist. The question is not whether we can work on Perl 5 major issues, the question is whether we'd be motivated to do so.
I know that this assumption is not true in my case -- if I wasn't working on Perl 6 I'd probably be out finding a $real_job somewhere, or working on some other new project not directly related to Perl development. It's very unlikely I'd find myself wanting to contribute to the Perl 5 core. This isn't at all intended to imply that I think that Perl 5 shouldn't be worked on; it's just that Perl 5 development requires different kinds of time, energy, and motivation investments that wouldn't bring me any real personal satisfaction.
Both Perl 5 and Perl 6 are volunteer-driven efforts, with very different sets of attractions for the people that self-choose to work on them. The problems (and opportunities) that exist in the Perl 5 domain are very different from the ones in the Perl 6 domain, and so they attract different sorts of volunteers. There's no "boss" that can force us to work on priorities that don't match our own -- it's all self-selection.
So although I hesitate to speak for others, I have the strong impression that if Perl 6 ceased tomorrow that very few of "the Perl 6 team" would suddenly decide to be working on difficult Perl 5 issues instead. I think that like me, most of us would just pick entirely different (non-Perl development) challenges altogether.
To be clear, I still love Perl 5. I'm very excited by the work being done by Enlightened Perl, Modern Perl, and the like. I think these are incredibly worthwhile efforts and have only praise for the people undertaking them. But the tasks involved in Perl 5 development don't appear to be things that motivate me (and others like me) to want to work on them.
Let me insist: trying to build Perl 6 is less useful to real, practical perl than actually working on Perl 5.
This may or may not be true, but it's completely beside the point. For me, it's not a question of whether my time and energy would be better spent working on Perl 5, it's whether there's anything about Perl that makes me want to work on it more than the many other (non-Perl) projects I could be doing instead. I'm not motivated by the idea of volunteering my personal time and energy solving challenging Perl 5 issues. I am motivated by the idea of building Perl 6.
Pm
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T05:05:58
Is anyone paying you to work on perl 6?Re:Fix It!
chromatic on 2009-08-31T06:28:48
You can't expect me to believe that the [Perl 6] team can't work on that.
I tried, repeatedly. I didn't get very far. Given the pace of Perl 5 major releases, it'll be several years before misfeatures such as the SUPER static bug gets fixed in the core, if it ever gets fixed.
That has nothing to do with a lack of resources and nothing at all to do with so-called distractions from Perl 6.
Re:Fix It!
chromatic on 2009-08-31T10:19:39
I think the point which is lost is that the users aren't clamoring for a "lexically overrideable, self-hosting grammar engine."
Devel::Declare isn't self-hosted, but it's an important development in Perl 5 language extensibility all the same. See also Regexp::Grammars.
Re:Fix It!
pmichaud on 2009-08-31T05:21:36
Let me spell it out for you: drop this insane perl 6 thing immediately. Give us good, stable threading in perl 5 instead of self-hosting grammars in perl 6. Et cetera.
Halting Perl 6 development today will not cause stable threading in Perl 5 to appear sooner than it otherwise would. Neither "stable threading in perl 5" nor the other features you've mentioned are blocked because of Perl 6 development. As far as I know, none of the existing Perl 6 developers are at all interested in working on these features for Perl 5. If you want them to appear quickly in Perl 5, then find (and perhaps pay) some people who are interested in developing them for Perl 5. Perl 6 isn't the blocker or bottleneck for these features.
However, the Perl 6 design team and developers are very interested in hearing from Perl 5 and other folks about what they'd like to see in a stable threading model, because Perl 6 currently doesn't have one specced. So if you can describe what you'd like to see in Perl 5 threading, we'll happily steal those ideas for Perl 6 and implement them as quickly as we can.
In fact, I'm even willing to claim that similar to what happened with Moose, Perl 5 will get stable threading sooner by our continuing Perl 6 development than by halting it.
Pm
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T05:30:57
Well, if I can help... I've given this issue some thought in the past and can put together a wishlist of what *I* think would be useful. Of course, it's just my opinion, but stealing from a few other langs.
If that sounds good, where do you want me to send the info? - ank
Re:Fix It!
pmichaud on 2009-08-31T05:52:50
Well, if I can help... I've given this issue some thought in the past and can put together a wishlist of what *I* think would be useful.
Oh, that would be terrific! The ideal place for such ideas would be on the perl6-language mailing list. I will be honest up front that sometimes discussions and threads on that list quickly become bikesheds and messages get initially warnocked, but all of the thoughts and ideas that enter that list do get noticed and consideration from the core design team. Not everything proposed gets accepted into the design, but the designs do generally take all of the proposals into consideration.
And since we're especially looking for ideas on threading and concurrency, I think they're likely to get extra attention. And there are enough people interested in threading/concurrency that I think we could see some prototype implementations relatively quickly (order of weeks or months). This is an area where we really do want to be able to explore implementations before trying to come up with a design (again, similar to what happened with OO in Perl 6).
If you'd prefer to submit initial ideas in a less public forum, you can email them to me and I'll happily forward them directly to the design team or otherwise make sure they enter the relevant conversations (and keep you posted as to where discussions are leading).
Regardless, I'd be eager to see what you and others have to say!
Pm
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T16:05:50
I have reconsidered, after reading where the logo came from, and how only a person or two gave the idea of getting professional help a second thought.
I will not be sending you anything. I don't wish to have any part in it; mostly because I fear for my mental wellbeing.
Re:Fix It!
Aristotle on 2009-08-31T18:23:16
Far be it from to suggest it is already in peril.
:-) Re:Fix It!
Aristotle on 2009-08-31T18:33:06
Oh and btw, if you never post your ideas anywhere, then good luck waiting for the perl5-porters to read your mind and give you the sane threading you at least seemed to be wanting.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-09-01T20:25:47
Thanks for the encouragement; this is part of the list I was working on:
- Simple stuff: sleep, time, run in backgournd, etc
- Multithreaded data structures
- Windows and other OS multithreading support
- locks, semaphores and the like. built-in every object (a-la java)? or independent (a-la) python?
- hyperthreading vs. CPUs vs. cores vs. number of threads
- debugging
- forking and multithreading: friends? also put other stuff into it
- sharing and copying data; marking data as belonging to a thread (thread ownership)
- thread worker/queues/whatever abstractions, and how they can be taken
- talking to native code; interfacing with non-safe code.
- apple's grand central dispatch: we should totally think about that.
- "use more CPUs" / "use cpus => 4"
- thread safety
Sadly, it's nothing more than a few very-high-level points that need description and discussion, but I don't see how that can happen, seeing what lwall is like - i'm more likely to create my own thing or contribute to another programming language. - ank
Re:Fix It!
jdavidb on 2009-09-10T16:29:58
i'm more likely to create my own thing or contribute to another programming language
Cool. Then you'd get what you want, right? That would be great for all concerned, wouldn't it?
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-09-12T01:12:35
I don't "want" anything - I'm happily writing software in many languages. You still don't understand the problem. Can't see the forest for the tree, so to speak.
I just think it's sad that the perl 6 project has taken so long and has exhibited every single software project problem there is - especially overscoping - from a group of "world's best Perl programmers" who should really know better.
I also have deep concerns about having Larry Wall as a leader. The logo speaks for itself.
I'm really tired of discussing this, and there's nothing else I can say.
-- ank
Re:Fix It!
pmichaud on 2009-09-01T00:52:03
I have reconsidered, after reading where the logo came from, and how only a person or two gave the idea of getting professional help a second thought.
The discussion on the list is not the sum-total of all discussions on the topic -- it has also been discussed on IRC. Several more than two of us have floated the idea of using a professional designer -- we just didn't use the mailing list to suggest or discuss it.
And fwiw, I did get a professional designer to come up with the temporary logo for Rakudo.
Pm
Re:Fix It!
hfb on 2009-09-01T18:13:13
By which, do you mean the part about larry suggesting it feminizes Perl?
... I also take it as a given that we want to discourage misogyny in our community. You of the masculine persuasion should consider it an opportunity to show off your sensitive side. :) I remain in utter awe of the whole thing....have the entire lot of folks gone off their meds or something? Women who survive in this business will not be seduced into thinking a language with a feminine butterfly must be a lot less full of assholes than it really is. I suppose it's better than calling the language 'thrustmaster' with a giant penis as a logo but, you know, I don't think the logo really influences much in terms of who does and who doesn't use the language. It's a short trip to crazytown here.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-09-01T18:33:52
It's not just that. It's also the complete lack of a coherent plan to promote the programming language. It's the idea that planning doesn't matter at all, and that "it will be done when it's done." It's a bunch of the comments that I've seen. If you really want, I can quote...
I agree that it doesn't influence, but only when it's sane. At the end of the day, a client has to buy this, and this guy is not going to put his money on a language that doesn't have a coherent attitude towards promotion, marketing, development, etc. An insane logo certainly doesn't help.
I have had a talk with Larry Wall over IRC, and I'm not sure whether I should post what we spoke, because, frankly, I'm perplexed.
I quickly designed a logo that I think is more professional, just to start off a conversation, and it was rejected at once by our benevolent dictator... if you want to see it, it's here.
Lastly, one thing is clear to me: if a person is to design a plan to help make Perl 6 more appealing to people outside the main mid-age-male-geek demographic, that person is definitely not Larry Wall.
Re:Fix It!
chromatic on 2009-09-01T18:48:02
... if a person is to design a plan to help make Perl 6 more appealing to people outside the main mid-age-male-geek demographic, that person is definitely not Larry Wall. Do it, then. If people agree with you, people will work with you. If they don't, they won't. That's how community-driven development works.
It's the idea that planning doesn't matter at all....
Nonsense.
You're welcome to believe that hordes of volunteers not immediately dropping what they're working on and hewing to your vision of what Perl 6 should be (and what's not, in your words "insane") and working in lockstep to make it so means that There Is No Plan!!!!, and you're welcome to say it, but it's still nonsense.
An insane logo certainly doesn't help.
I fail to care about people whose interest in Perl 6 diminishes to zero because they think the logo looks silly or juvenile or too saturated or whatever other ridiculous epithet anyone cares to spew. I write software for reasonable people to evaluate reasonably.
Like Larry, the fact that you're offended on behalf of someone else who may be offended (and who may or may not exist) affects what I work on not one bit.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-09-01T19:18:20
Nonsense??? "IT WILL BE DONE WHEN IT'S DONE". That's a thousand times more annoying and incoherent than a stupid logo.
I am not offended and do not care who is offended or not. This is a fabrication of yours, trying to put me in a position that is comfortable for you and your work.
About community-driven development, I think you are forgetting the monetary factor. You are certainly no freeloading hippie. Neither are most of the core developers, right?
Again, I'm getting really tired of trying to open your eyes, and I don't get paid to spend time designing perl 6. Otherwise it would already have been done - just not with all the useless crap and line noise you couldn't let go of.
Re:Fix It!
chromatic on 2009-09-01T20:00:34
I think you are forgetting the monetary factor. You are certainly no freeloading hippie. Neither are most of the core developers, right?
In eight years of working on Parrot and six and a half years of working on Perl 6, I've had $800 worth of travel compensated and received (I believe) $3500 in grant money. That's less than a week's wages at my consulting rate.
This is not a lucrative hobby.
Patrick and Jonathan have received much more in grant money (and Rakudo's progress demonstrates that), but they're both receiving far, far less than fair market value for their work.
A few other Parrot and Perl 6 contributors have received modest grants. You have to stretch the truth far past the breaking point to claim that this makes Perl 6 or Parrot funded development not primarily developed by the community.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-09-01T19:34:05
And one last thing: I proposed and designed an alternative logo. It was ignored, and Larry went as far as to call himself a professional designer. I think I need not point to the guy's homepage.
Please note that the logo itself did not change the way I saw the perl 6 project. I just think it's a final kick in the teeth for some long time users of perl.
Re:Fix It!
hfb on 2009-09-01T18:55:12
Well, I don't know that professionalism or a well-formed plan is always so needed, especially in the original spirit of opensource but, to anyone who thought P6 was, or has become, a joke by way of 8 years of design will not be dissuaded from that position by that site. It might even persuade many others who were merely neutral into thinking the language has reached it's comic endpoint.
And no, a man who can't confront the people who make perl an unfriendly misogynistic place will not get a pass with a fluffy butterfly by suggesting it does anything towards that end.
Re:Fix It!
petdance on 2009-08-31T05:58:17
This is carried on over at http://perlbuzz.com/2009/08/perl-6-development-does-not-detract-from-perl-5.html . It should help explain some of the misunderstandings.Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-08-31T16:18:07
Carried on by you and your friends. Your analysis is not only incorrect (an infinite number of contributors? are you insane?) it also fails to look at what could have been done without perl 6 being there.
The fact that chromatic uses a comment to pitch his testing book is especially pathetic.
Re:Fix It!
petdance on 2009-08-31T17:17:29
I didn't say "infinite" I said "unbounded." You have a scarcity point of view, and I see the world as abundance.You're ignoring the three points of the post, and carrying on the idea that if only Perl 6 didn't exist, you would have what you want in Perl 5. There is simply no reason to believe that.
What I see here is someone who's just very angry, and that anger is all you can bring to the table. Rather than understand and accept the help from numerous people (me, Patrick Michaud, etc) who have tried to help steer you to the path of actually getting what you want, you've been just insulting and dismissive. I'd love for you to get what you want, but you're your own worst enemy on this.
I wish it weren't so.
Re:Fix It!
chromatic on 2009-08-31T18:14:09
The fact that chromatic uses a comment to pitch his testing book....
That is a complete fabrication.
Re:Fix It!
ank on 2009-09-01T01:01:37
I find it funny that you take a chance to talk about a "testing revolution" in that perlbuzz post. If that's not a pitch, I don't know what it is. But hey, you have to live somehow, right?Re:Fix It!
chromatic on 2009-09-01T01:33:15
I find it funny that you take a chance to talk about a "testing revolution" in that perlbuzz post.
If you'd read the linked post, you'd realize that it's an example of how Perl 6 actively improved Perl 5.
If that's not a pitch, I don't know what it is.
Clearly.
There are two allusions of books in the linked post. One is about MJD's original title for Higher Order Perl. The other is about a book I was writing in 2000 that had nothing to do with software testing. As pitches generally mention the products or services they're trying to sell, I've either done a lousy job of injecting off-topic marketing speak and behavior into popular discussions or you're reading so far between the lines that the tiny electrons dancing in the luminous aether are giving you subliminal commands.
I rather think you've predisposed yourself to take great offense to the merest hint of anything you think other people might find unreasonable. That does not sound like a particularly healthy discussion strategy.
Re:Fix It!
stu42j on 2009-08-31T01:39:40
I'm not a design guy but here is my quick pass at toning down the colors:
http://saj.thecommune.net/perl6.org/index.html
Re:Fix It!
daxim on 2009-08-31T10:34:16
Applied in pugs r28128, thanks!Re:Fix It!
sigzero on 2009-08-31T17:00:03
Except for the butterfly...it is nicer on the eyes just from the muted colors.
Re:Fix It!
vek on 2009-08-31T18:06:02
If you have a better design, nothing stands in the way of your improvements.
I certainly couldn't do a better design. I'm not a graphic designer and can't draw a straight line with a ruler. I know when I'm out of my element and wouldn't even attempt it. Would you say that precludes me from being able to voice that I like or dislike something?
For example, I think the site looks unprofessional. Am I allowed to hold that opinion just because I couldn't do better or should I keep quiet?
Re:Fix It!
hfb on 2009-09-01T17:07:44
I'll second that opinion and sentiment.
It looks like a page a toddler would love except it made mine cry. I just thought it was a joke, until I noticed the furor here. It's not April, is it?
YMMV. HTH. HAND.
For a few hundred dollars, one of those design bounty sites could fix the ugly website problem pretty quickly.
And I imagine a professional website design could help garner more donations, so one could argue money to pay for it could easily come from your existing grant program.
Here is a design I made:
It only took a few minutes. I hope it fosters some talk and maybe helps understand why I think the current one is defective. It is only a work in progress, and we can change and improve on it a lot; but I just want to put this on the table to show that I'm not being deliberately obtuse; I seriously want the best for perl.
-- ank
Re:Constructive Criticism
cjfields on 2009-09-01T22:33:54
Here is a design I made...
It's a fairly decent start. However, sorry to say but (and I'm putting this politely) I don't think you've exactly endeared yourself to the point where you'll be listened to constructively
Burned bridges and all that. See above comments from you and the varied responses from active Rakudo/Parrot/etc devs for the smoking evidence. It didn't have to be so.
Re:Constructive Criticism
ank on 2009-09-02T03:34:00
Oh righteous devs! Please forgive me for daring to say something you didn't like!
It's sad that a bit of thorny commentary takes precedence over actual work. But I guess that's how it goes in the perl 6 dev circles.
Re:Constructive Criticism
Aristotle on 2009-09-02T04:57:21
A brilliant arsehole is still an arsehole. Many a free software project has gone to pieces because of people who thought the quality of their work should make up for their bad attitude – and then several of them ran into each other. That includes various phases in the lifetime of the very project you are disparaging for its lateness.
But feel free to continue to look down on others.
Re:Constructive Criticism
ank on 2009-09-02T05:13:27
Anyone can have a bad day or a bad week. I usually just clean up the mess and continue on a more positive note.
Re:Constructive Criticism
Aristotle on 2009-09-02T05:29:54
Good! (I’m not being sarcastic.) It just seemed you were trying to say bad general attitude can be justified.
Re:Constructive Criticism
ank on 2009-09-02T05:41:39
No, of course having a terrible attitude is not justifiable. I had to consider not only eating my words but also my career before starting to post.
I'm deeply saddened by some of the events in the perl 6 development; but I just don't know what else to do. The logo just seriously felt to me like a kick in the teeth and killer of hopes. Like a last straw.
Re:Constructive Criticism
ank on 2009-09-02T05:44:33
(I mean, of course, having a terrible *general* attitude)Re:Constructive Criticism
Aristotle on 2009-09-02T06:30:39
I can understand that. I was quite disillusioned for a long time… recently people seem to have gotten into the project who are really pushing it along, though, so I’m finally feeling hopeful. And the thing about extremely ambitious projects is… well, the flip side of high risk is high rewards. (I still haven’t seen anything close to the awesomeness of Apocalypse 5 implemented anywhere else, even so many years after it was written. I still can’t wait to play with it.) I do cringe at the Camelia thing… maybe if that was my first renewed impression of Perl 6 I’d be caustic too. As it is, it’s merely an irritation, hopefully one that can be fixed before too many people have a new reason to care about Perl 6. We’ll see.
Re:Constructive Criticism
ank on 2009-09-02T06:49:05
I think that a lot of that can be implemented using a mixture of FORTH-like defined words and parser combinators. I would make the syntax a lot simpler. But it would not be "perl 6", it would be something else entirely (because I don't own the brand *grin*).
If you haven't already done so, have a chat with the factor guys. They have some really cool stuff.
Re:Constructive Criticism
Aristotle on 2009-09-02T07:23:04
Hey, a fellow FORTH hacker. I have looked a bit into Factor, actually, but not gotten sucked into it.
Haskell’s Parsec is also pretty keen, FWIW.
They run along different lines though… there’s a reason I like Perl 5 so much, and Apo 5 has that quality too… those others just don’t (they have other nice qualities… but different).
Re:Constructive Criticism
ank on 2009-09-02T07:38:40
I believe the quality is the overall good Huffman coding
:) If you were to apply that to a mixture of those langs, you could get something very very nice. I hope I will at one point have time to work on that, as a hobby or otherwise. -- ank
Re:Constructive Criticism
Aristotle on 2009-09-02T10:31:18
Yeah, but I think it’s a bit more yet… along the lines of willingness to break regularity for the sake of Huffman coding, in spots where it will make a real difference. And it’s not just the parsing bit but the entire language around it as well, that’s huffmanised in a similar fashion. Whipuptitude and manipulexity… hard to describe.
