Smylers wrote:
If the initial release of Perl 6 doesn't have commonly-required
functions then people will write their own. People will do these in
incompatible ways, ensuring that when it's determined that the language
would benefit from having a particular function built in at least some
people will have to change their code to keep it working.
People will also choose different names for their functions. If C<part>
only appears in Perl version 6.0.3, there'll already be dozens of
scripts which have a sub of that name doing something completely
different.
Adding extra functions will create critical differences between versions
of Perl with very small differences in their version number. People
will get frustrated at needing a particular point-release of Perl to run
programs[*0].
Or, alternatively, people will shy away from using those functions --
which by definition are so useful in every day programming that it's
been decided to add them to the language -- because they want their code
to be portable, thereby defeating the purpose of adding them.
Perl 6.0.0 can't be perfect, but please can we aim to be as close as
possible. Releasing a language with the caveat "but we've missed out
lots of important functions that we expect to add in the next version or
four" strikes me as a little odd.
Amen! I deliberately requoted all of that because it's so very right
that I wanted everyone to reread it. ;-)
I have nothing to add except my wholehearted agreement, and a reminder of
how much trouble was caused in Perl 5 by not having one form of switch
statement, and therefore ending up with 23 forms of switch statement.
Damian
