On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 8:19 PM, Geoffrey Broadwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> Someone earlier in this thread mentioned that this can't be done
> directly because of rules surrounding TPF's non-profit status.
That someone was me and that's not what I said. I said it isn't as simple
as Bob
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 4:23 PM, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 21 February 2008 06:25:42 Joshua Gatcomb wrote:
>
>
> I could take a month's sabbatical from my day job for $5000 without losing
> insurance coverage or other benefits. That's slightly more than Audrey's
> $100/da
On Feb 21, 2008, at 14:42 , Larry Wall wrote:
Again, that was a really good argument for pugs, which among other
things *renewed* excitement in parrot. But pugs also demonstrated
some
difficulties with that approach. The fact is that every approach has
run into almost insurmountable diffic
Larry Wall skribis 2008-02-21 11:42 (-0800):
> : There are many important benefits to having several implementations,
> : including fun and education. But commercially and marketing-wise, it's
> : better to first assemble something that *works*, then to optimize its
> : performance.
> Hmm, indeed,
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 01:07:14PM +0100, Juerd Waalboer wrote:
: I would very strongly prefer to see a focussed effort towards a single
: full implementation.
:
: There are many important benefits to having several implementations,
: including fun and education. But commercially and marketing-wis
Larry Wall skribis 2008-02-21 11:15 (-0800):
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 01:29:05PM +0100, Juerd Waalboer wrote:
> : Then backtracking would happen, or more likely: Perl 6 would die. If
> : this community cannot come up with a virtual machine that can handle
> : Perl 6, then many people will lose all
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 01:29:05PM +0100, Juerd Waalboer wrote:
: Then backtracking would happen, or more likely: Perl 6 would die. If
: this community cannot come up with a virtual machine that can handle
: Perl 6, then many people will lose all hope.
Except that the people working on alternative
[...]
I was there at the workshop too. You cannot count me in into being biased
against Perl 6. Only biased that it takes so long :-).
I know, and there were some others (like Herbert aka lichtkind, who writes
and maintains the German Perl 6 wiki pages) with the same opinions.
But the ge
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know if that's a good idea - sadly many of them have the
perception that Perl 6 is vapour ware.
>>> I guess I have more trust in people than you do. :)
>>
>> ... and I just learned that my opions are biased.
>>
>> Last
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 11:55 PM, Conrad Schneiker <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've repeatedly encountered remarks about how much Perl 6
> development is constrained by the fairly severe time and
> energy constraints of its overwhelmingly volunteer
> development team.
Here is something to cons
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:14:13 +0100 (CET) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If you argue that most people want an implemenation that covers large
> parts of the specs, the most logical step would be to boost pugs
> development. It's the most advanced implementation by far.
> And I do believe that it can b
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know if that's a good idea - sadly many of them have the
perception that Perl 6 is vapour ware.
I guess I have more trust in people than you do. :)
... and I just learned that my opions are biased.
Last week I visited the German Perl Workshop, and heard many
>>I don't know if that's a good idea - sadly many of them have the
>>perception that Perl 6 is vapour ware.
>>
>>
> I guess I have more trust in people than you do. :)
... and I just learned that my opions are biased.
Last week I visited the German Perl Workshop, and heard many Perl 6
critical s
>>>Should it really? I mean: is the time right for that now?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Let's ask the other way round: Is this the time for only one
>>implementation? And who decides that it's the one based on parrot?
>>
>>What happens if parrot turns out to be a dead end? (very unlikely, but
>>possible).
>>
>>
On 21/02/2008, Juerd Waalboer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > (Someone wrote:)
>
> > > And who decides that it's the one based on parrot?
>
>
> It is the original plan to implement Perl 6 on Parrot, and the project
> that gets most developer attention.
>
>
> > > What happens if parrot turns out to
> (Someone wrote:)
> > And who decides that it's the one based on parrot?
It is the original plan to implement Perl 6 on Parrot, and the project
that gets most developer attention.
> > What happens if parrot turns out to be a dead end? (very unlikely,
> > but possible).
Then backtracking would h
> [...]
>
>>>To that end, I'm soliciting:
>>>(1) your suggestions for preparation,
>>>(2) your ideas for proposals, and
>>>(3) your reasons why the Perl 6 ecosystem (including Parrot
>>>and CPAN6) is one of the world's greatest and and most
>>>extremely leveraged causes (technically, econom
[EMAIL PROTECTED] skribis 2008-02-21 9:38 (+0100):
> 1) Let The Perl Foundation decide what to do with the money
> advantage: they already have a comitee (is that really an advantage? ;-)
> disadvantage: they seem to think that Perl 6 on Parrot is _the_ and the
> only way to go. (There's nothing w
[...]
Should it really? I mean: is the time right for that now?
Let's ask the other way round: Is this the time for only one
implementation? And who decides that it's the one based on parrot?
What happens if parrot turns out to be a dead end? (very unlikely, but
possible).
Let's give
[...]
To that end, I'm soliciting:
(1) your suggestions for preparation,
(2) your ideas for proposals, and
(3) your reasons why the Perl 6 ecosystem (including Parrot
and CPAN6) is one of the world's greatest and and most
extremely leveraged causes (technically, economically,
and social
> I've repeatedly encountered remarks about how much Perl 6
> development is constrained by the fairly severe time and
> energy constraints of its overwhelmingly volunteer
> development team.
I think that is a valid point.
On the other hand the language has to become mature gradually, and that
pro
21 matches
Mail list logo
