"Michael Mathews" schreef: > [attribution repaired] Ruud: >> [attribution repaired] Michael:
(Michael previously sent me an independent off-list reply; we're back on the list now) >>> As I gradually learn how Parrot works, I see that perhaps the idea >>> of decompiling byte-code into language ___ is only a pipe-dream. >>> But the point still remains--using the fact that one *could* mix >>> languages X, Y, and P into your company's source tree is a very >>> weak argument for Parrot/Perl6. I would say it is a non-argument. >> >> Not really. Think about a Cobol-to-Parrot translator. You could for >> example use Perl (glue) to add GUI stuff to old Cobol programs. >> >> Just see it as a way to solve real problems. You don't have to use it >> yourself. > > I'll try to be more clear. The original question was seeking opinions > on what the big gains were for companies to switch to Parrot/Perl6 > (someday). My point was that saying it would allow a mixture of > languages to be used in an application is, in my real-world > experience, not something companies are currently seeking, plus you > don't need to upgrade to do it, so it isn't really a selling point > worth bringing up to your local IT Manager type person. Then don't use this point to sell it to that manager. >>> it also means she now has to keep a >>> Java/PHP/Perl programmer around and happy whenever one of three >>> different languages might throw a buggie. >> >> No, it is not limited by that. > > Huh? Let me give an actual example. A major broadcasting company I was > contracted with needed to change part of their gigantic code base that > dealt with a data source of live sports scores (which were > automatically displayed on air). The code was all Perl :-) except for > one chunk in Python--so guess where the problem was. This had to be > fixed FAST and no one in the office knew Python well enough to do it, > including me (the guy who wrote the Python was long gone to work at > Google). In the end it was decided to rewrite that chunk in Perl. I > can tell you, there definitely was cursing in the office that day, and > I doubt anyone there would see it as a plus to have the ability to mix > languages more easily. I just wouldn't put it that way if I were > trying to sell Perl6 to a business manager. I already knew from the start that you had a bad experience in this area. ;) Of course you don't want your car built partly with metric and partly with English measured parts. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication> But that is not what this is about. The feature is not designed to crash a spacecraft, but of course somebody will still use it for that. > In my experience Perl has an (undeserved) bad reputation in regards to > large, long-term projects because it allows "too much" flexibility. That will not change. > Really that means management has to do work to set and enforce > standards, but those managers aren't going to be impressed by hearing > Perl 6 makes it easy to mix lots of different languages together. > Nevermind how cool/useful I personally think that is. I like it that Perl5 and C go so well together. I dislike Java, so I don't care for it. Let's just make Perl6/Parrot the ultimate Cobol "shell" as well. -- Affijn, Ruud "Gewoon is een tijger."
