Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > Eventually, of course, we'll have to go back and make eveything
>> > copacetic, but at the moment I think most folks would rather have us
>> > working on writing unwritten A's and E's, rather than rewriting
>> > written ones. ;-)
>>
>> Point. Maybe someone will step up to plate and do Perl 6 so far in a
>> nutshell; and will keep it up to date. Maybe that someone will be me,
>> but if anyone else would like to volunteer...
>
> Eventually Larry and/or I will have to go back and work the whole thing
> through. I've already had thoughts on "Perl 6 in a Nutshell", and I'm
> sure Larry will want to do "Programming Perl 6".
>
> The problems with having someone update the previous documents are:
I wasn't really suggesting updating the previous documents. I was
thinking more of keeping a single document that tracks the current,
published state of perl 6. I think I might have a crack at it myself,
see if I can come up with anything useful. (Show, don't tell...)
>
> a) We lose the historical development,
>
> b) It's a constantly moving target (go back and read the
> early A's and E's and see just how much has changed every
> single time we released another A or E),
>
> c) Larry would still have to executive edit the changes, and
> that would take far too much of his time (just dealing with
> the Exegeses takes far too much of his time).
Hmm... that's the showstopper isn't it?
--
Piers
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in
possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite."
-- Jane Austen?
