3 ms·
I would say yes, but only in the form of a new language with differences from the older forms. Scheme -> Racket Common Lisp -> Clojure ML -> Haskell If perl f
by threwawasy1228 7y ago
I would say yes, but only in the form of a new language with differences from the older forms.
Scheme -> Racket
Common Lisp -> Clojure
ML -> Haskell
If perl followed this format and did a rebrand that is essentially the same thing, they would be more likely to pick up traction. Perl just in the name itself gives me a certain connotation. Typically the older variants of languages for the most part die off, while the newly branded ones gain traction, but carrying on the same basic mission. This last one is particularly sad to me personally the Standard ML ecosystem is still to this day incredibly robust and production-tier, and yet it is very much a dead language.
- nicwolff 7y agoThat's pretty much what Raku is – a substantially new language, with a new name but the same mission as Perl.
- gmfawcett 7y agoI don't understand the lineage that you've charted here. ML is older than all the others; Haskell is older than Clojure and PLT/Racket; Common Lisp is older than Racket/PLT, etc. The arrows don't make any sense.
- rwallace 7y agoI think he's charted three separate lineages, with no cross-lineage relationships implied.
- threwawasy1228 7y agoIt was meant to be 3 separate lines, I made a formatting mistake that I can no longer edit.
- gmfawcett 7y agoAhh... thank you for explaining. :)