7 ms·

> Perl 6 is Lisp with a perly syntax Lisp syntax is super simple. But this simple syntax can hide an enormous complexity. Metaprogramming is complex. Lisp is

> Perl 6 is Lisp with a perly syntax Lisp syntax is super simple. But this simple syntax can hide an enormous complexity. Metaprogramming is complex. Lisp is so powerful, but it's not so widely used as other languages because of this complexity. Now, Perl 6 claims to have the same power as lisp, only that instead of using a simple syntax, it is using a complex one, and a complex way of modifying that syntax. This is complexity wrapped in more complexity. I'm sorry but I don't think Perl 6 will ever be a very widely used programming language as its predecessor was. It might however amuse a small group of hackers who want to test new ideas in programming languages.

raiph 11y ago
Did you use more than logic to arrive at your conclusion, e.g. did you spend a while having fun, or at least trying to have fun, coding with Perl 6 before you reluctantly concluded it wasn't going to work out or did it never really appeal in that way to you in the first place?
- ceronman 11y ago
  I've in fact been playing with Perl 6. First a year ago, and then again when it was released. I've found and reported bugs. And I do think it has very powerful features. But hell it's hard to learn and very complex in my opinion.
  - raiph 11y ago
    Thanks. It's good to hear that you've tried to enjoy it and drawn conclusions from that experience. Imo Perl 6 has some easy on ramps and then a long and winding learning road that can be tiring to navigate due to pot holes, inadequate doc and tools, and lots of yak shaving. I wonder if you agree that bugs, weak doc, and an immature ecosystem and tooling are a significant contributor to the toll exacted by the long (endless?) learning curve? Also, if you've used and liked Perl 5 I'd be interested in your opinions about how you think the relationship of the two Perls will evolve.
  - brudgers 11y ago
    Larry Wall talks about Perl 6 chasing Paul Graham's idea of a 100 year language (though he'd be happy with 30 or 40). [1] So I think it might be fair to say he takes a longer term view of programming languages and learning them than some other people...if 15 years of incubation wasn't enough evidence in itself. [1]: https://www.linuxvoice.com/interview-larry-wall/ https://www.linuxvoice.com/interview-larry-wall/
thesz 11y ago
The problem of Lisp is the side-effecting nature of it. There's nothing complex in metaprogramming, if you do it in pure setting. The problems arise when you combine two differently side-effecting pieces of software and Lisp does nothing to prevent that or help there. I won't stop repeat that mantra that side effects and program state are an implicit information channel in a program. This channel is shared by many parts (or parties) inside program and it has some specific implicitly specified protocol of use. Add a piece of software that uses the channel with slightly different protocol as assumption, get ready for all sorts of problems.
- junke 11y ago
  Of course there are side-effects. This is the whole point of a dynamic _system_ where (almost) everything can be redefined at runtime.

raiph 11y ago

Did you use more than logic to arrive at your conclusion, e.g. did you spend a while having fun, or at least trying to have fun, coding with Perl 6 before you reluctantly concluded it wasn't going to work out or did it never really appeal in that way to you in the first place?

ceronman 11y ago
I've in fact been playing with Perl 6. First a year ago, and then again when it was released. I've found and reported bugs. And I do think it has very powerful features. But hell it's hard to learn and very complex in my opinion.
- raiph 11y ago
  Thanks. It's good to hear that you've tried to enjoy it and drawn conclusions from that experience. Imo Perl 6 has some easy on ramps and then a long and winding learning road that can be tiring to navigate due to pot holes, inadequate doc and tools, and lots of yak shaving. I wonder if you agree that bugs, weak doc, and an immature ecosystem and tooling are a significant contributor to the toll exacted by the long (endless?) learning curve? Also, if you've used and liked Perl 5 I'd be interested in your opinions about how you think the relationship of the two Perls will evolve.
- brudgers 11y ago
  Larry Wall talks about Perl 6 chasing Paul Graham's idea of a 100 year language (though he'd be happy with 30 or 40). [1] So I think it might be fair to say he takes a longer term view of programming languages and learning them than some other people...if 15 years of incubation wasn't enough evidence in itself. [1]: https://www.linuxvoice.com/interview-larry-wall/ https://www.linuxvoice.com/interview-larry-wall/

thesz 11y ago

The problem of Lisp is the side-effecting nature of it. There's nothing complex in metaprogramming, if you do it in pure setting. The problems arise when you combine two differently side-effecting pieces of software and Lisp does nothing to prevent that or help there. I won't stop repeat that mantra that side effects and program state are an implicit information channel in a program. This channel is shared by many parts (or parties) inside program and it has some specific implicitly specified protocol of use. Add a piece of software that uses the channel with slightly different protocol as assumption, get ready for all sorts of problems.

junke 11y ago
Of course there are side-effects. This is the whole point of a dynamic _system_ where (almost) everything can be redefined at runtime.