Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Don't ask to ask, just ask
 
PerlMonks  

Proposal for a Perl 6 section?

by DACONTI (Scribe)
on Jun 19, 2007 at 22:20 UTC ( #622126=monkdiscuss: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

Hi guys,
I just saw that the activity and postings related to Perl 6 seem to increase.
I would find a good idea to make a dedicated posting to Perl 6 so that:
-we can introduce new and old perl monks to perl 6
-we favorize Perl 6 popularity itself (just barely needed now!)
What do you think?

Ciao,
DACONTI

Comment on Proposal for a Perl 6 section?
Re: Proposal for a Perl 6 section?
by jdporter (Canon) on Jun 19, 2007 at 22:47 UTC
Re: Proposal for a Perl 6 section?
by hossman (Prior) on Jun 19, 2007 at 22:50 UTC
Re: Proposal for a Perl 6 section?
by eric256 (Parson) on Jun 19, 2007 at 23:02 UTC

    While this probably isn't a good idea, what about adding some way to keyword a node as you post it and then the ability to search based on keywords? I know keywords have been kicked around a bit, but they would make a nice way to tag posts as perl6 without having to continualy mangle titles.

    I'm sure that part of the reason more hasn't been done with the keywords is that users have to actualy add keywords, but if users could add their own keywords as posting wouldn't that theoriticaly help? Especialy in a case where more and more people are going to want to distinguish between p6 and p5 code.

    As an implementation detail perhaps posts could just have check boxs at the bottum labeled perl5 and perl6 to make quickly adding the perl56 keyword would be easy and painless??


    ___________
    Eric Hodges

      That role is pretty well filled by node titles. Granted, not perfectly; but a good keyword system is not as trivial to implement as you might think at first.

        I seem to recall a tidings from a few months ago indicating that topic tags may be coming in the future...

        -Paul

        A keyword system is already in place, search on it should be a simple matter, and I don't think putting crap in node titles that is actualy a tag not a title is a good solution.


        ___________
        Eric Hodges
      Hi Eric,
      I find your point interesting but I think Perl 6 is far too much important to be just put as a flag in the postings.

      In fact perlmonks is actually implicitly Perl 5 driven:
      that means, that some sections, for example Obfuscation or Poetry were totally inspired by the nature of Perl (Perl 5).
      Now, in some postings they say that Perl 6 is another kind of language, a language which we actually still dont know much.
      Moreover, the big difference between perl 5 and perl 6 is that, while we do use perl 5, with perl 6 we just play a bit but nothing more at the moment.

      So, to think that Perl 6 would fit on perlmonks structure is a bit of illusion,
      and it is not worthwhile the effort of a flagging system at the moment.

      On the contrary a simple Perl 6 section would be actually good to catalyze a bit the whole Perl 6 interest.

      Perl 6 is so important that a section about this topic is simply natural.

      Even if my question is naive and off topic, by looking at the past we see that it was periodically posted many times, so I would say, if 4-5 monks asks for a topic, this topic has a right to existence!

      Please don't be structural, be functional!

      Davide

        so I would say, if 4-5 monks asks for a topic, this topic has a right to existence!

        If that was the rule, we'd have probably tens of sections by now.

        --shmem

        _($_=" "x(1<<5)."?\n".q·/)Oo.  G°\        /
                                      /\_¯/(q    /
        ----------------------------  \__(m.====·.(_("always off the crowd"))."·
        ");sub _{s./.($e="'Itrs `mnsgdq Gdbj O`qkdq")=~y/"-y/#-z/;$e.e && print}
        that means, that some sections, for example Obfuscation or Poetry were totally inspired by the nature of Perl (Perl 5).

        OT, but makes me wonder: will 6 make for better or worse obfu? The absence of a zillion predefined variables is a counter argument. But the modifiable grammar makes me dream of whole new scenarios that I... well, cannot even dream of!!

        Now, in some postings they say that Perl 6 is another kind of language, a language which we actually still dont know much.

        Nope, it's another language of of the same kind as Perl 5. In a sense, it aims at bringing the qualities of the latter to new heights.

        On the contrary a simple Perl 6 section would be actually good to catalyze a bit the whole Perl 6 interest.

        Perl 6 is so important that a section about this topic is simply natural.

        The fact is that currently the general consensus has always been contrary to your assumption. And as you said some people already have asked the same thing. The fine point is that general consensus is made by people and, with people, it changes over time. So just stay tuned. In the meantime, it seems that PM is not just the best place to discuss Perl 6 related stuff... although occasionally it happens, and TimToady often takes part to the discussions. By contrast, in clpmisc, which is my other favourite Perl resource, Perl 6 discussions tend to arise even more sparsely: in fact there the focus is strongly on how to do things in Perl, not "about Perl". (Just think about it much like a SoPW-like thingie only, but with a grain of salt of course.) OTOH there are the p6* MLs, various blogs, e.g. audreyt'ss and other places much better suited if not strictly dedicated to Perl 6 stuff. I also know that summaries and interesting articles about development and what not get posted regularly to use Perl; so reports may be similarly posted here, but all in all evidence is that we don't see, as a community, a compelling necessity to do so...

      While this probably isn't a good idea, what about adding some way to keyword a node as you post it and then the ability to search based on keywords? I know keywords have been kicked around a bit, but they would make a nice way to tag posts as perl6 without having to continualy mangle titles.

      I know that this will sound like something I'm inventing just know to partecipate, but in all earnestness I'm thinking of a tags-enabled PM for some time now, mostly in relation to an entirely different issue, and like a dream: in fact I'm fully aware that even relatively simpler proposals more or less automatically get the "patches welcome" answer... what can be of one that would supposedly require massive additions and integration into an already existing infrastructure that was not thought for it?

      Yet, in line of principle, I am strongly convinced that a tags system would be a great thing to have and that's why I continue to refer to it as a dream: I've come late to blogs and social bookmarking where they're typically used - and I'm still not terribly familiar with their respective nor similar technologies. But I've seen and to some extent used the thing and I perceive its full potential. Granted, even from such a naive POV as mine I can understand and even foresee myself jdporter's remarks about the difficulties of setting such a system in a reliable way.

      As far as blogs are concerned, it's all up to the the blogger to choose tags in a sensible manner that will be useful to her readers... but when we come to tags a social means... how should they be managed? Completely freely on part of the users? Based on an officially approved set, possibly subject to collective discussion and revision? Comprising both possibilities? Should there be aliases? (E.g. 'webdev' for 'web' and 'development'.) Given that PM discussions have a hyerarchical structure too, should tags be properties of individual nodes or of threads? And in the former case should they be inherited automatically, provided that the author of a reply also could remove or add some? Should the supplied tags be subject to administration? If so, wouldn't that complicate things too much? How should we mediate between KISS and power, or better, get the maximum power out of the KISSest scheme? ("Seiryoku Zen'yo")

Re: Proposal for a Perl 6 section?
by DrHyde (Prior) on Jun 20, 2007 at 10:15 UTC
    Gets my vote. Anything to get all the perl 6 shite out of the way.
Re: Proposal for a Perl 6 section?
by ikegami (Pope) on Jun 20, 2007 at 13:42 UTC

    we can introduce new and old perl monks to perl 6

    Actually, it would have the opposite effect. Would a monk be more likely to read twice as many sections, or catch a glimpse of Perl6 that might spark his interest while reading the sections he is already reading?

    If the monk was already interested in Perl6, maybe the former is true. If you'd like to see more people intersted in Perl6, then the latter is much more intersting.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://622126]
Approved by GrandFather
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others having an uproarious good time at the Monastery: (7)
As of 2014-09-19 03:17 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    How do you remember the number of days in each month?











    Results (129 votes), past polls