I see things differently. I think that the question "is Perl 6
production ready?" is a meaningful and fairly important question.
"Can I reasonably expect to use Perl 6 in a production environment?"
The question has as much (or more) to do with implementations than the
spec, but that doesn't make the question unimportant. I can use C90 and
Fortran 95 in a production environment they are supported by stable,
robust compilers that produce good quality code. I can use most of C99
and Fortran 2003 in production if I control the compiler.
It is entirely legitimate to ask whether Perl 6 is ready for use in a
similar sense. Is there at least one implementation that covers enough
of Perl 6, with enough quality and speed, that one can reasonably expect
it to work well in production?
The feeling that I get from the discussions in this forum, and I mean no
offence by this, is that people try to divert the question because they
do not like the answer. If Perl 6 + implementations had a support
comparable to C99 or Fortran 2003, I strongly suspect that most people
would have answered with "yes, it is production ready".
On 11/22/2011 10:09 PM, B. Estrade wrote:
Well said. Also, the OP shouldn't confuse Perl 5 (the
interpreter-defined language) with Perl 6 (a language definition for
interpreters/compilers). The latter benefits from the fact that "Perl 5"
is whatever "perl" says it is - for better or worse.
So, asking if "Perl 6 is production ready" is like asking if
HPF, C++11, ECMA-262 is "production ready". It just doesn't make sense
even if the spirit of the question is mostly understood to mean a
"production implementation". Language designing and drafting is a
funny thing, and history is wrought with *many* very interesting
languages being designed, but failing to gain enough traction to
elicite a "production" or (fully implemented) compiler/interpreter. The
exercise itself is still extremely valuable and beneficial to all involved.
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:38:15AM +0400, Richard Hainsworth wrote:
Yet again this thread starts up.
Yet again it will end with no one changing their opinions, their
expectations, or the time-span of their vision.
Personally, I use perl6 in my professional analytical work. I can
express solutions to problems elegantly and with a minimum of work.
I am not entirely concerned with the speed for most things, but that is
the nature of what I do.
When I am concerned with speed, I fall back on perl5 and especially
perl5 routines that interface to optimised libraries.
But I am really frustrated when I go back to perl5 because it feels so
clunky compared to perl6.
Ruby and Python overtaking Perl? So what? Neither of them have as much
either of those, I recoil in loathing. Truly I just cannot see why they
or java - it's the way I react to them.)
There are things that are worth doing, and doing well. Implementing
Perl6 belongs to that category of things that have value in themselves.
That is why there are still people still working on Perl6. But if you
cant see the beauty in it, or the progress that has been made, you wont
ever see it. Shame, but that's life.
I have followed Perl6 from the first discussions, the RPCs, the
Apocalypses, Exegeses, Synopses, played with pugs, and rakudo. I have
helped it along with some bug reports and occasional questions and patches.
Sure it's frustrating to be waiting for something and it not to be
there. I waited for Rothfuss's Wise Man's Fear, after reading Name of
the Wind. Now I am waiting for the end of the trilogy and it's
frustrating because Rothfuss hasnt finished it. He is taking the time to
make it what he wants it to be. I want to see how the plots get
resolved. Frustrating, but that's life!
Lets stop asking about 'production ready' releases. And making snarky
remarks when the expected replies come back. It's like asking a
republican about a tax increase. No I am not suggesting a flame war on
politics, but it's another example of asking the wrong question to
someone who already views the world with a different perspective.
Nothing good comes from it, no new light on a subject done to death
already, no change of heart or view by anybody involved. So why do it?
On 11/22/2011 08:26 PM, Wendell Hatcher wrote:
Thanks, so it isnt production ready like a release which would be an
official release of a new version of perl 5? I have the feeling after well
over 5 years this will never happened. I hope Perl 6 doesnt get seen as a
novelty or toy and people simply never use it if this hasnt already
happened. Ruby is passing Perl by like Python did.
On Nov 22, 2011, at 9:08 AM, Tadeusz So??nierz wrote:
On Tuesday, November 22, 2011 16:59:52 Wendell Hatcher wrote:
Are there people using Perl 6 in production at this time? Is Perl 6
I'm not overweight, I'm undertall.