I too re-read PM's journal. Note his explicit desire to avoid
'stability' as a goal at this stage for rakudo because of its imprecision.
We often use words that have different shades of meanings for different
people/situations, eg., what is a 'short' time? Consider how a child
might answer, as opposed to an old person. Suppose a historian is
speaking, as opposed to an archeologist, or a geologist, or an astronomer.
So 'stability', which is related to a concept of time, depends on the
nature of the task. If you want a language so set in stone that every
aspect of it is known and imutable, and has a syntax and functionality
that will not be changed for the forseeable future, then you need a
language that is a fossil. Given the short history of computer science
in the context of human history, fossilised languages are no longer
interesting to modern developers. Indeed, virtually nothing in the
computer world has much stability: how often do operating systems change
- Ubuntu updates every six months and people consider this a feature
rather than a flaw. The Windows cycle is something like two-three years,
with changes in the formats of MS Office files, eg., doc/docx.
Consequently, Patrick chose a definition for rakudo * that is
appropriate for this stage in the development of perl6. It will not be
appropriate for everyone, but that is the nature of life.
Personally, I am looking forward to rakudo *.
Richard
Matthew Wilson wrote:
As written in pmichaud's journal entries, "stability" is explicitly
*not* (and never was) one of the goals of the April 2010 release of
Rakudo.
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 7:24 AM, Steve Pitchford
<steve.pitchf...@gmail.com> wrote:
I think this question was largly addressed in the first link?
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Wendell Hatcher <
wendell_hatc...@comcast.net> wrote:
I actsully read the fact sheets in the past and want to confirm that a
stable production qaulity release of perl6 is coming out this April or at
the berry least the summer
<snip>
