5 ms·

I want to like perl6, I really do. The language has some simply great features. I agree with the parent, this seems like a terrible way to get people new int

I want to like perl6, I really do. The language has some simply great features. I agree with the parent, this seems like a terrible way to get people new into the language. I do a fair amount of perl5 script maintenance, so am familiar with the language. Advents calendars are daily small chunks, an Ideal way to introduce the language but they turned this into a "look how clever" our language is post, which to me is "wow this is hard to read and maintain." Lamentably these examples don't give me hope that Perl6 is going to be any better at being maintained.

dsnuh 9y ago
I still think that if they had just called it something other than Perl, they may have picked up a little more traction.
- jrs95 9y ago
  Perhaps it's not too late for rebranding it?
  - dsnuh 9y ago
    I'm not sure at this point. I used to write quite a bit of Perl 5 and didn't really understand why Perl 6 seemed like it was trying to be everything to everyone and I didn't see what problem domain it was really the obvious choice for picking it over another easier to comprehend language.
  - natch 9y ago
    They are stuck with the community and the culture they have, I think. A different name would not change the nature of what it is.
    - dsnuh 9y ago
      True, but even if they had just called it Parrot or Lerp or Rakudo or really anything but Perl 6, I feel like they could have attracted the kind of new userbase to augment an already thriving community. I didn't follow along with all 594 years of development, it seemed to me like Larry just went nuts with adding every CS novelty. It didn't feel like a language for mere mortals to me anymore.
  - smacktoward 9y ago
    That ship has sailed, I fear. The brand damage from calling it Perl 6 is old enough to drive now.
wlll 9y ago
A syntactically cleaned up Perl that didn't feel like the object system had been bolted on afterwards would have been what I wanted in Perl 6. That, and it being released in 2002. I've long since moved on though.
- jerf 9y ago
  Given what all happened, it turns out you pretty much could have had that in 2002, and it was called Python. I don't mean this as an entry in the Perl v. Python flamewar; I mean that more like "as long as you were going to have to move from Perl 5 to Perl 6 anyhow, Perl 5 -> Python isn't that much harder", and it gives you what you say you want in 2002. (Ruby fits too but IIRC came in later; if it existed in 2002 it had not yet crossed the Pacific.)
  - wlll 9y ago
    2002 was handwavy. I ultimately moved to Ruby as my primary language (I'm now 50/50 Ruby/Go). FWIW I tried Python, I just didn't like it. I've programmed a lot of languages and most I'm fine with, I just didn't like the way Python felt.
    - kbenson 9y ago
      I think that's why a lot of Perl coders were resistant, and why a lot eventually moved to Ruby. There's a big difference between having some gripes cleaned up and having the fundamentals of what programming feels like in the languages be almost diametrically opposed. It's also likely why there have been multiple (for the most part failed) projects over the years trying to do just what you asked for. Sometimes it bears fruit in other places, but future Perl has always been beholden to, and held back by past Perl, and Perl's extreme commitment to backwards compatibility. That's actually seeming to change a little recently, with newer version actually removing long deprecated features, which bodes well for interesting future change.
      - jerf 9y ago
        I know what you're getting at, but if you find Python and Perl to be diametrically opposed languages, you may want to spread your wings a bit and try something really different. From my point of view, on the grand programming landscape, they're right next door to each other, and at the global scale that includes things like SQL, Prolog, J, Verilog, etc., barely distinguishable. (The dynamically-typed scripting languages form a fairly tight cluster overall, with Lua hanging out a bit.)

dsnuh 9y ago

I still think that if they had just called it something other than Perl, they may have picked up a little more traction.

jrs95 9y ago
Perhaps it's not too late for rebranding it?
- dsnuh 9y ago
  I'm not sure at this point. I used to write quite a bit of Perl 5 and didn't really understand why Perl 6 seemed like it was trying to be everything to everyone and I didn't see what problem domain it was really the obvious choice for picking it over another easier to comprehend language.
- natch 9y ago
  They are stuck with the community and the culture they have, I think. A different name would not change the nature of what it is.
  - dsnuh 9y ago
    True, but even if they had just called it Parrot or Lerp or Rakudo or really anything but Perl 6, I feel like they could have attracted the kind of new userbase to augment an already thriving community. I didn't follow along with all 594 years of development, it seemed to me like Larry just went nuts with adding every CS novelty. It didn't feel like a language for mere mortals to me anymore.
- smacktoward 9y ago
  That ship has sailed, I fear. The brand damage from calling it Perl 6 is old enough to drive now.

wlll 9y ago

A syntactically cleaned up Perl that didn't feel like the object system had been bolted on afterwards would have been what I wanted in Perl 6. That, and it being released in 2002. I've long since moved on though.

jerf 9y ago
Given what all happened, it turns out you pretty much could have had that in 2002, and it was called Python. I don't mean this as an entry in the Perl v. Python flamewar; I mean that more like "as long as you were going to have to move from Perl 5 to Perl 6 anyhow, Perl 5 -> Python isn't that much harder", and it gives you what you say you want in 2002. (Ruby fits too but IIRC came in later; if it existed in 2002 it had not yet crossed the Pacific.)
- wlll 9y ago
  2002 was handwavy. I ultimately moved to Ruby as my primary language (I'm now 50/50 Ruby/Go). FWIW I tried Python, I just didn't like it. I've programmed a lot of languages and most I'm fine with, I just didn't like the way Python felt.
  - kbenson 9y ago
    I think that's why a lot of Perl coders were resistant, and why a lot eventually moved to Ruby. There's a big difference between having some gripes cleaned up and having the fundamentals of what programming feels like in the languages be almost diametrically opposed. It's also likely why there have been multiple (for the most part failed) projects over the years trying to do just what you asked for. Sometimes it bears fruit in other places, but future Perl has always been beholden to, and held back by past Perl, and Perl's extreme commitment to backwards compatibility. That's actually seeming to change a little recently, with newer version actually removing long deprecated features, which bodes well for interesting future change.
    - jerf 9y ago
      I know what you're getting at, but if you find Python and Perl to be diametrically opposed languages, you may want to spread your wings a bit and try something really different. From my point of view, on the grand programming landscape, they're right next door to each other, and at the global scale that includes things like SQL, Prolog, J, Verilog, etc., barely distinguishable. (The dynamically-typed scripting languages form a fairly tight cluster overall, with Lua hanging out a bit.)