4 ms·
The real problem with these kinds of posts is the equivocation in the word "dead". People wanting to defend languages (also APL lately) want to implicitly use
by jerf 5y ago
The real problem with these kinds of posts is the equivocation in the word "dead".
People wanting to defend languages (also APL lately) want to implicitly use a definition something like "0 people are using it and no work is being done in it", but by that standard you can't ever declare anything dead. That doesn't make the definition "wrong" but it does make it not useful. The purpose of a definition is to split the relevant set of possibly values into at least two non-empty sets.
Other people are looking at the first and second derivatives of how many people are using it, how popular it is now compared to its height (in the programming language world it's already a problem if your "height" of usage isn't right now), and the likelihood of it ever coming back.
From that point of view, Perl 5 is, if not dead, certainly very close. To me, most tellingly, Perl 5 has no plausible path that I've heard for acquiring some unique value proposition that can give it a new lease on life. As I said in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26567151 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26567151 , in a lot of ways Perl's biggest problem right now is that it won. It convinced people that its way was good, and as a result, Perl's previous value proposition has been incorporated wide and far in other languages. The only time I pick up Perl now is when I have the need for a seriously heavy-duty string munging task that fits into about 200 lines, and I get huge wins from the RE syntax in Perl. And by time-of-use, Perl is probably my "best" language, the one I've used for more clock time than any other. Even so, that's where I am in 2021.
I would encourage the community to either decide that it's OK just continuing on as it is, or decide that it wants to try to find that new unique value proposition that will give it some sort of unique value in 2023 or 2024. But there isn't an option where Perl continues along as it is and it experiences some sort of burst in growth. You have to pick one, you can't get the advantages of both.
- newaccount2021 5y agoif people want to try to quantify "dead", a good place to look at is activity on cpan https://metacpan.org/recent https://metacpan.org/recent many packages I rely on have weekly updates
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- justinator 5y ago> I would encourage the community to either decide that it's OK just continuing on as it is, or decide that it wants to try to find that new unique value proposition that will give it some sort of unique value in 2023 or 2024 But that's what Perl 6/Raku was supposed to be, right? And that turned out to be a disaster.
- jerf 5y agoI don't guarantee the success of an effort to find a new value proposition! It is necessary, not sufficient. And it broke away so far from Perl 5 that it is no longer Perl 5's new value proposition. The Perl 5 community will need to come up with one of their own.
- justinator 5y agoIn time it broke away but ~20 years ago, the promise was backwards compatibility. Looking back, that's madness, but it's one of the decisions that totally grounded development of Perl 5.
- notreallyserio 5y agoThis sort of absolutism is so frustrating. If the term doesn’t describe something 100.00% right, someone’s going to nitpick. Analogies suffer the same fate.