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

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

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

 ()  Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 0xEBD27418  perl hacker &
 /\  kung foo master: /me does not drink tibetian laxative tea: neeyah!

Attachment: pgp7l1B9MmXgY.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to