Larry Wall wrote:

Now, it might well be that a Perl standards body could specify a
mininum suggested set of modules for any distribution to enhance
interoperability, but we haven't got to that point yet, I don't think.
This would be great though!!
Even if it is afterward, it is still a lot better than nothing!
perl6 offers a lot of new nice features in the grammar itself,
but the lack of standards over than those of programming 'best practices'
could be a problem.
When I started to learn perl5,
I have read (and am still reading because I am far to be a good programmer^^;!), a lot of books, online tutorials but none of them were doing it the same way!
And I am still trying to get it!
(What I liked though it is that I have learnt of lot more than other languages!)
I guess perl6 is a solution to this problem thanks to the grammar itself.
This is great, I think.
But the above concerns regarding standards modules are a real issue too
it should not be underestimated.

Anyway, that's the reasoning behind supplying as little as possible
with the P6 kernel.  We don't want anyone mistaking it for a
distribution in the first place, nor do we want us language lawyers
to evolve into any kind of "official distribution board".  Central
planning doesn't scale over the long term.  We should restrict our
"federal" activities to those that help all the "states" get along
with each other, at least well enough to avoid a civil war.

Of course, as the U.S. proved at the beginning, when you fear a
strong federal government it's possible to invent too weak a federal
government.  There's a balance in there somewhere that we're still
trying to figure out...


シリル・デュモン(Cyrille Dumont)
our work is the portrait of ourselves
tel: 03-5690-0230 fax: 03-5690-7366

Reply via email to