3 ms·

Whether that was intended, unintended or the opposite of what was intended seems to be what we are really talking about here. Let's assume the Rakudo developer

Whether that was intended, unintended or the opposite of what was intended seems to be what we are really talking about here. Let's assume the Rakudo developers acted in good faith per your reasonable default. The effect is still that Parrot is all but abandoned, multiple productive developers with decades of practical experience attempting to implement P6 no longer contribute to either Parrot or Rakudo, and Rakudo isn't obviously more usable than it was three years ago. The effective delivery date of P6 is still "some time in the future". The fourth anniversary of Rakudo Star is approaching and it hasn't met its goals. Even if Rakudo were released in a stable, 6.0 form today, I still wouldn't use it for anything I care about because I don't trust its developers to deliver usable software reliably.

kbenson 12y ago
Rakudo isn't obviously more usable than it was three years ago I don't believe that to be true. Even if by usable you mean primarily can be used in production, I would still argue it's more usable that it was, even if I wouldn't label it strictly "usable." I wouldn't shell out to bc for math ops, for any number of reasons (including it being slower for my purposes), but I wouldn't call the bc utility unusable. I don't trust its developers to deliver usable software reliably I can't fault you for that conclusion, given your experiences. That said, developers involved in a project change over time, as does the influence of existing developers (and maybe you believe people can change, too). That conclusion may become more or less true over time, and indeed may have already changed. Perhaps some day you'll find a reason to be interested again, and find the experience more enjoyable. We can only hope. :)