Oops, my typo, I mean very interesting points from everyone!!!

On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Tom Metro <[email protected]>wrote:

> John Redford wrote:
> > The future of Perl is more likely to be one of changeless stagnation,
> > near-universal existence, popular usage for infrastructure, and limited
> or
> > no use for general purpose programming. And I am not sure why Perl users
> > would be upset by that -- I don't see anyone upset that bash or grep
> aren't
> > being used more widely and replacing languages/tools that aren't all that
> > much like them anyway. One might be content to see Perl do best that
> which
> > it does best, and not worry about the things it does not do.
>
> "...not sure why Perl users would be upset by that?"
>
> Because Perl spent a good number of years as a good quality, general
> purpose programming language, developers got use to that, and now that's
> going away.
>
> Because developers - likely to their detriment - become emotionally
> invested in the tools they use, particularly ones that have been around
> as long as Perl has. They want it to be viable, so they can continue
> using it.
>
> This may not be rational, but its easy to see why it happens.
>
>
> > The Little presentations are spot-on when they describe Perl as being
> "glue"
> > -- that was its origin and that is what it was one best at.  Now it's
> not.
> > And it won't be again.
> >
> > Perl's popular origin was based on its operation as a tool that glued
> > together the functionality (not the code) of existing tools like sed,
> grep,
> > find, sort, sh, and so forth.
>
> This is all true, and yet utterly irrelevant. If you look into the
> historical origin of many languages you will find an initial purpose
> that its current use has greatly diverged from.
>
> (Actually, for many of the tools you list, technically Perl didn't glue
> them together, but rather subsumed them. Once I learned Perl, I
> practically never used awk or sed again. But that's besides the point,
> as Perl was indeed a consummate glue language.)
>
>
> > Also, any time I hear Perl advocates talking about how dynamic typing is
> > better than static typing, it just reminds me that Perl doesn't have type
> > inference.
>
> Supposedly planned for Perl 6. (I'm guessing as a way to make the code
> easier to run on the JVM.)
>
> What do you see as the advantage to type inference over dynamic typing?
> The obvious one seems to be that it lets you emulate dynamic typing in a
> statically typed language by doing all the dynamic typing determination
> at compile time, and thus better efficiency.
>
> How often do you run across cases where the compiler infers incorrectly?
>  Doesn't it defeat the purpose of choosing a statically typed language?
>
> This feels much like an implementation detail. From the programmer's
> perspective, they want dynamic typing, and the execution to be fast.
> Whether that's implemented under the hood as run-time dynamic typing or
> compile-time type inference should be irrelevant to the programmer, as
> long as their performance objectives are met.
>
>
> > Of course, the substantial problems of Perl are intractable.  One cannot
> fix
> > them without changing Perl into a completely different language -- even
> if
> > one maintained backwards compatibility, there would be a serious
> question of
> > why one would bother to do so.
> >
> > ...there is not much you can take away from the language and still
> > call it Perl.
>
> Now if only there was a language that was shiny and new, leapfrogged the
> other dynamic languages with innovative design, all while incorporating
> the spirit and flavor of Perl, so former Perl developers would largely
> embrace it....
>
> Oh yeah, Perl 6.
>
> When Perl 6 for hit the scene, I don't think enough Perl developers were
> ready to jump ship to it, even if it had been production ready. Now that
> it is finally getting close to being usable, is it still innovative, or
> more on parity with the competition?
>
>  -Tom
>
> --
> Tom Metro
> Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
> "Enterprise solutions through open source."
> Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boston-pm mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
>

_______________________________________________
Boston-pm mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm

Reply via email to