4 ms·
Most of these points are definitely valid (kudos to ActiveState, yeah parallelism could use a boost, and we're definitely no longer in Kansas when it concerns p
by DanielShir 15y ago
Most of these points are definitely valid (kudos to ActiveState, yeah parallelism could use a boost, and we're definitely no longer in Kansas when it concerns perl 6).
However, I do agree with the notion that perl should just stay perl. Do we really need opaque objects? hygenic macros?
The backer issue is relevant though. I always wondered if Objective-C would have died off in a corner somewhere if not for the iPhone and Apple backing it. Perhaps strong backing from a powerful modern company would do the trick. I'd cast my vote for Amazon :)
- phaylon 15y agoI'm not sure hygienic macros are gonna be that much of a top-seller in user code, I agree. But there are situations where it would be very handy, especially as library developer. Macros would for example make optimized code generation a lot nicer. I feel it's the same with the work towards a core MOP. It will be hard to convince regular users why the new thing is better, but for people writing extension, auto-documentation tools, or other introspective systems it'd be a huge relief (at least to me). The difference I see is that instead of extending OO in the sense of a framework on top (Object::Tiny, Class::Accessor), you compose in behavioral extensions.