On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 23:11:32 -0800, Allison Randal wrote: > On Feb 7, 2006, at 19:21, Stevan Little wrote: > >>Perl 6 will get implemented. > >Oh, of that I have no doubt. Never did, and neither does Yuval (if I > >may speak for him while he is asleep :). But all that we are trying to > >do here is shake out some cobwebs, a little spring cleaning if you > >will. > > Excellent. I wish you much fun! :)
Does this imply that we should think up this process? If so, I have made many many contributions on this topic to perl6-language on this topic, and I feel like they have been mostly overlooked. If I propose a concrete plan for the implementation of Perl 6 in a layered fashion it will probably be even more overlooked. I have no authority, and this is not something I can do on my own. I am asking for your (all of you) help in clarifying the big void in the middle - the design of the perl 6 runtime, not just syntax/features. What I'm suggesting is a start in this clarification - trying to componentize the existing syntax/feature spec that we do have, so tha the design of the runtime can be simplified and more concrete/attainable. -- () Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 0xEBD27418 perl hacker & /\ kung foo master: /me does not drink tibetian laxative tea: neeyah!
pgp7l1B9MmXgY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
