David Hodgkinson writes:
> > If we can get past Larry, I imagine we'll make really rapid
> > progress.
>
> Is a coup out of the question?
The emergency backup plan of airlifting him from California to
Colorado and chaining him to the keyboard remains a backup plan.
Will advise HQ when time is ri
Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If we can get past Larry, I imagine we'll make really rapid
> progress.
Is a coup out of the question?
--
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star http://www.deep-purple.co
David Hodgkinson writes:
> Ah...but you don't have to actually _add_ the features, right?
Right, but neither do we want to spend ages trying to design perl6 to
support some crackhead feature only to have Larry say "no! bloody!
way!"
perl6 has really filled me with confidence in Perl. The dwind
Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Wistow writes:
> > > Or am I missing something?
> >
> > But you have to think about what new features you want to add when
> > you're redesigning the internals.
>
> What he said. One reason to rework the internals is to make it
> possible t
Simon Wistow writes:
> > Or am I missing something?
>
> But you have to think about what new features you want to add when
> you're redesigning the internals.
What he said. One reason to rework the internals is to make it
possible to add new features that would be impossible or prohibitively
sl
David Hodgkinson wrote:
> Or am I missing something?
But you have to think about what new features you want to add when
you're redesigning the internals.
Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yup, but the *real* point of perl6 is not to radically redesign the
> language (although a little housekeeping is a good thing), but more to
> redesign the internals. If we have to stick with perl5, we're in
> trouble. The internals are verra nast
Piers Cawley writes:
> Heh. However, from what I've seen, some of the stuff that's being
> discussed in perl6-internals has the look of stuff that may still be
> useful if we stick with perl 5, so even if it's "Not at all" there may
> prove to be benefits.
>
> Also, the way some of the perl6-lang
Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley writes:
> > > As Piers said, we are blocked on Larry. We're working on some
> > > interpreter design now, but some language issues really need to be
> > > nailed down before we know what we're going to be writing.
> >
> > Any idea how
nitially
discussed in'' - then encourage people that before they submit an RFC
they should of had it discussed in an open forum such as P5P, #perl
or even their local (or favourite) Perl monger list.
this has the ( devious ) side effect of gently spamming some people
about issues for Pe
Piers Cawley writes:
> > As Piers said, we are blocked on Larry. We're working on some
> > interpreter design now, but some language issues really need to be
> > nailed down before we know what we're going to be writing.
>
> Any idea how long we're going to stay blocked?
None whatsoever. Many
Andy Wardley writes:
> It might also draw the all-talk-and-no-trousers crowd away from the
> serious perl6 development process. It would give us, er, I mean *them*
> somewhere to rant without bothering too many people doing the real work
> on crafting Perl 6.
Yes, and no. The pro
development process. It would give us, er, I mean *them*
somewhere to rant without bothering too many people doing the real work
on crafting Perl 6.
A
--
Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Signature regenerating. Please remain seated.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For a good time: http://www.kfs.org/~abw/
Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Cantrell writes:
> > From what I can tell, there ain't a lot happening.
>
> As Piers said, we are blocked on Larry. We're working on some
> interpreter design now, but some language issues really need to be
> nailed down before we know what
David Cantrell writes:
> From what I can tell, there ain't a lot happening.
As Piers said, we are blocked on Larry. We're working on some
interpreter design now, but some language issues really need to be
nailed down before we know what we're going to be writing.
Nat
Greg McCarroll sent the following bits through the ether:
> has anyone been keeping up with the Perl 6 mailing lists and the Perl 6
> project in general? i'd like to have a look into some of the proposals
> and i've sort of lost touch with it all.
The RFC's are availabl
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 11:57:46AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> has anyone been keeping up with the Perl 6 mailing lists and the Perl 6
> project in general? i'd like to have a look into some of the proposals
> and i've sort of lost touch with it all.
>From what I can t
Greg McCarroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> has anyone been keeping up with the Perl 6 mailing lists and the Perl 6
> project in general? i'd like to have a look into some of the proposals
> and i've sort of lost touch with it all.
It's kind of blocked on Lar
has anyone been keeping up with the Perl 6 mailing lists and the Perl 6
project in general? i'd like to have a look into some of the proposals
and i've sort of lost touch with it all.
--
Greg McCarroll http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net
19 matches
Mail list logo
