On Thu, 2011-24-11 at 12:43 +0100, Raphael Descamps wrote: > I think that it's a common misconception: a time-frame of 10-20 years > for developing a "new" programming language is absolutely normal.
It's also worth looking at C++. This is a good reference: http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/dne.html Stroustrup documented the adoption rate quite carefully. See p36: http://www.research.att.com/~bs/hopl2.pdf The table on p36 of the paper is also in the book. After 10 years C++ had 50,000 users. It's not the same as perl6 but it's worth comparing. Since C++ was originally built on C and perl6 is being built on parrot, a straight comparison of user counts is not completely valid. There's a bit more here: http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html Specifically: http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#invention All things considered, perl6 is doing ok. -- --gh