Greg McCarroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> * Leon Brocard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Coo, coo, see the fabled perl6, remark how it looks just like perl5,
> > wonder if anything's different and if there's a point to all this ;-)
> Blasphemy ahead ..........
> I don't think Perl 6 can be a tremendous leap forward, not because
> of RFC's along the lines of `Perl must stay Perl', but because
> the next leap forward is VisualPerl which will be as much about
> IDE as core language. Now lets not get hung up on the IDE bit
> of that statement, its more about how people build programs
> than the interface they use, the IDE merely focuses them towards
> a certain methodology of building software.
> And just to complete my final blasphemy, Visual Basic, may have
> a shit language behind it, it may have performance problems, 
> it may be very limited and may force you to implement the guts
> as of any serious program you write as C/C++ DLLs but
> is still the most impressive implementation of a programming 
> language/dialect that I have ever seen, barring one or two
> domain specific languages, such as the visualisation software
> which I have forgotten the name of.

I tried to use VB once. I kept thinking "Why isn't this as good as
Interface Builder is on NeXTSTEP?" Actually, I find myself thinking
that when I use almost any IDE...

Piers Cawley

Reply via email to