Re^4: Reference in Perl 6

[pmichaud]

But that doesn't give Perl 6 folks any rights to call Perl 5 Ugly or Complex or has tough edges and things like that.

Moritz mentions this in another posting, but I want to emphatically reaffirm: I did not define or call Perl 5 an "ugly, complex, or rough" language, I said there are others who think that way about Perl 5. I encounter such folks quite frequently at (non-Perl) conferences and events.

When I show these folks what we're doing with Perl 6, they often become interested in Perl again (or for the first time). And when I say that "Perl 5 has adopted many of these Perl 6 concepts as well", they start to reconsider what they think and say about Perl 5, too.

Once again, an Anonymous Monk posts a knee-jerk response without examining what was actually written. (I know I should not be surprised at this.)

We'll see how strong Perl 6 holds out against Perl 5 when they are in competition in the real world.

This statement again seems to presuppose that Perl 5 and Perl 6 are locked in some sort of competition against each other, and that there can be only one winner. As I said in my original post, I categorically reject the notion of a competition (other than a friendly and mutually-supportive one) between the two. I'm a person who likes and uses both Perl 5 and Perl 6; as far as I can tell having multiple tools to solve problems works just fine for me, and I suspect it will work just fine for others as well.

Pm