On Thu, 5 Sep 2002 10:27:05 -0700 Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Speaking of Sub/Coroutine/Continuation, right now we *really* need
>someone who pretends to understand this stuff to take a look at
>Jonathan Sillito's patches and do something with them. Or give him
>commit privs, or somethi
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 11:11:45PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> Thanks, Steve. I agree 100% with everything you said!
>
> Except:
>
> > ... the best way to that
> > goal is to use Perl6 as the driver, at least until something else
> > shows up, because that's the only way to derive realistic req
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 10:27:42PM -0400, Melvin Smith wrote:
>This is no surprise. Parrot documentation will be lacking until
>things settle down.
Actually it's not so much the documentation. I didn't complain about
0.0.7 and 0.0.8 requiring changes to parrot-gen.py, because that's
simply to be
At 11:23 PM -0400 9/4/02, John Porter wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
>> John Porter wrote:
>> > Some folks seem to think that sufficient reason exists now.
>>
>> That's fine. You don't have to convince some folks. You have to convince me.
>
>Actually, uh, I was kinda hoping that some folks would c
Oops, I seem to have sent this direct to Dan instead of to the list.
Sorry for the duplication, Dan.
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 07:42:24AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 7:34 AM -0400 9/4/02, John Porter wrote:
> >Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> >> ... I don't see how giving the list a
> >> different name w
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ?
s/dev/code/, of course.
--
John Douglas Porter
Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> make things easier for others to get more of a community buy-in, at the
> expense of effort by the Perl folks, but there's no guarantee that those
> people will come.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ?
--
John Douglas Porter
Dan Sugalski wrote:
> John Porter wrote:
> > But what does Larry think?
>
> Hadn't particularly asked him. Does it really matter?
Not if you say it doesn't.
--
John Douglas Porter
Dan Sugalski wrote:
> John Porter wrote:
> > Some folks seem to think that sufficient reason exists now.
>
> That's fine. You don't have to convince some folks. You have to convince me.
Actually, uh, I was kinda hoping that some folks would convince you. :-)
Anyway, whenever someone (and it see
Thanks, Steve. I agree 100% with everything you said!
Except:
> ... the best way to that
> goal is to use Perl6 as the driver, at least until something else
> shows up, because that's the only way to derive realistic requirements
> for what needs to be accomplished.
The incorrectness of that i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerome Quelin) writes:
In the works is a new mail setup where we easily can have lists at
other domains and still have them available via nntp etc. At that
point I can create a dev at parrotcode.org list or something like
that. (or when the perl6 people want to work on the int
On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 15:48, Steve Fink wrote:
> I'm actually somewhat surprised at how little Parrot is tied to Perl.
I've no clue whether I agree or not. OT1H, given its origins from the
bosom of Perl, Parrot is surprisingly independent. OTOH, compare where
Parrot is to where it *might* have
At 12:41 PM 9/4/2002 -0400, Andrew Kuchling wrote:
>[Please CC: me on any responses.]
>First reason I don't work on it very much:
>
>1. Frankly, it's not much fun. I can spend my free time writing
>Python code, an environment I like, or I can work in the unfamiliar
>and uncomfortable Parrot build
I'm actually somewhat surprised at how little Parrot is tied to Perl.
Most of the active developers seem to be working on parrot for its
merits as a VM. Perl6, for me at least, mostly provides evidence that
this isn't just an exercise in intellectual masturbation, as Simon
would say -- there will
[Please CC: me on any responses.]
I follow the perl6-internals list through checking the archive, and
noticed Jerome's posting. I wrote the parrot-gen.py script that he
pointed to. Here are my comments on this issue.
(Note that I do not speak for the python-dev gang as a whole, but
AFAIK I'm
From: Dan Sugalski
>
> At the moment, how many people outside the tight little club
> actually care about the name of the mailing list? And how
> many more would really care if we changed the name?
Answer: You can hardly require a realistic answer to that question because
you won't know until yo
Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 7:40 AM -0400 9/4/02, John Porter wrote:
> >
> >Some folks seem to think that sufficient reason exists now.
>
> That's fine. You don't have to convince some folks. You have to
> convince me.
Being ultra-pragmatic, the name change:
- costs nothing
- might make some folks
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 07:42:24AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 7:34 AM -0400 9/4/02, John Porter wrote:
> >Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> >> ... I don't see how giving the list a
> >> different name will have any real effect ...
> >
> >?
> >
> >It will have a huge psychological effect, at least outs
At 7:40 AM -0400 9/4/02, John Porter wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Once there's sufficient reason, and I'm pretty easy on this, we'll
>> switch to a more neutral look.
>
>Some folks seem to think that sufficient reason exists now.
That's fine. You don't have to convince some folks. You have t
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Nope. What's more likely is that Parrot will accumulate bits from
> other languages--rather than losing Perl we'll gain Ruby and Python.
> Maybe others too.
Parrot: There's more than one language to do it.
Sorry but I couldn't resist,
Rod
--
"Ope
At 7:36 AM -0400 9/4/02, John Porter wrote:
>Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>> IANADan, but he's aware of these issues, and is/has been thinking about
>> them.
>
>Fine. But what does Larry think?
Hadn't particularly asked him. Does it really matter?
--
Dan
-
At 7:34 AM -0400 9/4/02, John Porter wrote:
>Sean O'Rourke wrote:
>> ... I don't see how giving the list a
>> different name will have any real effect ...
>
>?
>
>It will have a huge psychological effect, at least outside our tight
>little club. But if that's only as far as you can see...
Real
Dan Sugalski wrote:
> What's more likely is that Parrot will accumulate bits from
> other languages--rather than losing Perl we'll gain Ruby and Python.
> Maybe others too.
But that doesn't address the real issue, which is --
Are we really serious about enabling other languages to target this
m
Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> IANADan, but he's aware of these issues, and is/has been thinking about
> them.
Fine. But what does Larry think?
> We're not going to fool anyone that this isn't a Pet Perl Project, and
> while other communities are eyeing us, it's not clear that the amount of
> work
Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> ... I don't see how giving the list a
> different name will have any real effect ...
?
It will have a huge psychological effect, at least outside our tight
little club. But if that's only as far as you can see...
--
John Douglas Porter
On Wed 04 Sep 2002 03:47, Richard Soderberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Markus Laire wrote:
>
> > > * the name "perl6-internals" is really too restrictive (but this point has
> > > already been discussed last week).
>
> > Would it be possible to rename "perl6-internals" no
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Markus Laire wrote:
> > * the name "perl6-internals" is really too restrictive (but this point has
> > already been discussed last week).
> Would it be possible to rename "perl6-internals" now to something
> better like "parrot-internals"?
+1.
> There probably are some
At 12:26 AM -0400 9/4/02, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>IANADan, but he's aware of these issues, and is/has been thinking about
>them.
Heh. Well, I am. Lucky me. :)
This is something I've been thinking about since we formally
announced we were going semi-language-neutral.
>Separating Parrot isn't a
IANADan, but he's aware of these issues, and is/has been thinking about
them.
Separating Parrot isn't as trivial as s/erl/arrot/g, and probably won't
be done *completely*.
We're not going to fool anyone that this isn't a Pet Perl Project, and
while other communities are eyeing us, it's not clear
On Tue, 2002-09-03 at 17:03, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Markus Laire wrote:
> > Would it be possible to rename "perl6-internals" now to something
> > better like "parrot-internals"?
>
> I think aliases can take care of this, though I'm not the sysadmin.
> Maybe it makes people fe
Sean O'Rourke:
# > Would it be possible to rename "perl6-internals" now to something
# > better like "parrot-internals"?
#
# I think aliases can take care of this, though I'm not the
# sysadmin. Maybe it makes people feel better to send mail to
# "parrot-internals" instead of "perl6-internals"
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Markus Laire wrote:
> On 3 Sep 2002 at 22:17, Jerome Quelin wrote:
>
> > Hi there,
> >
> > As a recent parroter, what striked me most while reading perl6-internals, is
> > that it's very perl-centric. Ok, I agree that:
> > ...
> > * the name "perl6-internals" is really too re
On 3 Sep 2002 at 22:17, Jerome Quelin wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> As a recent parroter, what striked me most while reading perl6-internals, is
> that it's very perl-centric. Ok, I agree that:
> ...
> * the name "perl6-internals" is really too restrictive (but this point has
> already been discusse
33 matches
Mail list logo
