It's totally true.
And for many good reasons. The communities who's wheels we are reinventing are not open. They are not welcoming. They are anally retentive. They expect us to bend to their rules. Well Perl always made its own rules, and for that it needs a VM made for them. But they should perhaps look back at themselves and think just why we're reinventing wheels. Perhaps they need to reinvent their own rulebooks? I mean how successful has Smalltalk and Scheme really been in the commercial world? Not terribly. Even compared to Perl's small standards. | [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
Well, as Larry says, "If you're determined to reinvent the wheel, at least try to invent a better one."
And if the current vm techology is an all-purpose radial, then the Perl6 effort is a high-performance tire, capable of higher speeds, tighter turns, and performance in worse conditions. And it's optimized for the kind of driving that the Perl6 car does.
Seriously, Perl needs a different type of VM than Java. Go to dev.perl.com or talk to Dan Sugalski or Simon Cozens to see why.
-pete
Entropy is not what is used to be. | [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |