On Wed, 16 May 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:
I don't think Perl 6 can be a tremendous leap forward, not because
of RFC's along the lines of `Perl must stay Perl', but because
the next leap forward is VisualPerl which will be as much about
IDE as core language. Now lets not get hung up on the
Greg McCarroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Leon Brocard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Coo, coo, see the fabled perl6, remark how it looks just like perl5,
wonder if anything's different and if there's a point to all this ;-)
Blasphemy ahead ..
I don't think Perl 6 can be a
Paul Makepeace [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 10:06:22PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
And just to complete my final blasphemy, Visual Basic, may have
a shit language behind it, it may have performance problems,
it may be very limited and may force you to implement the
* Simon Cozens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 10:06:22PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
of RFC's along the lines of `Perl must stay Perl', but because
the next leap forward is VisualPerl which will be as much about
IDE as core language. Now lets not get hung up on the IDE
* Nathan Torkington ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Greg McCarroll writes:
I don't think Perl 6 can be a tremendous leap forward, not because
of RFC's along the lines of `Perl must stay Perl', but because
the next leap forward is VisualPerl which will be as much about
IDE as core language.
Paul Makepeace wrote:
The - to . conversion [...] will be a wonderful thing.
To be honest, I never understood the point of that conversion. Is it an
attempt to make Perl look more like VB? Or like Java? Or trying to save
keystrokes? Simplify the lexer?
The array seemed fine to me the way it
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 01:26:17AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
I tried to use VB once. I kept thinking Why isn't this as good as
Interface Builder is on NeXTSTEP? Actually, I find myself thinking
that when I use almost any IDE...
Heh. Same here, although if you discount Interface Builder, VB
Now I'm not buying into the argument on either side, but it does remind
me of a lovely quote by Australian programming legend Alan Kennington:
Eiffel is some sort of avant-garde French computing
movement which believes that programming is reactionary
and oppressive.
David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Indys are very nice indeed. However, I think I got a pretty good deal
when I swapped mine for a loaded Sun SS1000e :-)
Sellout!
--
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 10:13:23AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
p.s. I have never used Delphi.
scores 8/10 as a BD language (it *is* related to Pascal :-)
scores 9/10 for does-what-you-expect
OTOH the documentation (when I used it) scored -1.
(Whereas VB3 (or was it VB4) scored -INFINITY
Robin Szemeti [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
you see quite a few go on Yahoo .. Indys seem to be about 100 quid,
OK, that's slightly more than the shipping from Londres to Baaf...
--
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 01:27:32AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
Delphi rules.
Still not as good Interface Builder + Objective C + AppKit +
NeXTSTEP...
Having used both, I totally disagree. YMMV of course :-)
Interface Builder is damn good but plenty of stupid shit in it (why
am I setting
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 12:59:53PM +0200, Philip Newton wrote:
Paul Makepeace wrote:
The - to . conversion [...] will be a wonderful thing.
To be honest, I never understood the point of that conversion. Is it an
attempt to make Perl look more like VB? Or like Java? Or trying to save
Coo, coo, see the fabled perl6, remark how it looks just like perl5,
wonder if anything's different and if there's a point to all this ;-)
- Forwarded message from Nathan Torkington [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: Nathan Torkington [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Damian Conway's Exegesis 2
To:
Leon Brocard writes:
Coo, coo, see the fabled perl6, remark how it looks just like perl5,
wonder if anything's different and if there's a point to all this ;-)
Jihad on Leon, anyone? :-)
perl6 is supposed to look a lot like perl5. If it didn't, we'd call
it Python or something like that.
* Leon Brocard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Coo, coo, see the fabled perl6, remark how it looks just like perl5,
wonder if anything's different and if there's a point to all this ;-)
Blasphemy ahead ..
I don't think Perl 6 can be a tremendous leap forward, not because
of RFC's along the
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 10:06:22PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
And just to complete my final blasphemy, Visual Basic, may have
a shit language behind it, it may have performance problems,
it may be very limited and may force you to implement the guts
as of any serious program you write as
17 matches
Mail list logo
