Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Think about Loose Coupling

Re^2: How much Perl6 have we got? (take 2)

by bronto (Priest)
on May 11, 2007 at 15:57 UTC ( #614946=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: How much Perl6 have we got? (take 2)
in thread How much Perl6 have we got? (take 2)

First things first: thanks for the article.

Hmm. How exactly am I "compromising myself"?

Eh, that's my dictionary's fault: I asked for "sblianciarsi" and I got back " fig. to commit oneself, to compromise oneself.". And since "commit" looked weird to me, I took the second choice.

Just to explain, a literal translation of "sbilanciarsi" in italian is "to lose one’s balance". That's used in a figurative way to mean that when you are asked to tell an estimation for something, and the estimation is difficult, you face the risk of saying an estimation anyway. That was the sense in which I used "to compromise oneself". If I somehow offended you, I apologize and I didn't mean to.

Regarding the remainder of your comment, if you say "Perl 6 will soon be here" you make me believe that you have an idea of when it is released. I am a bit too down-to-earth to make sense of a phrase that contains both the sentence "Perl 6 will get here when it gets here" and "Perl 6 will soon be here". If I think at myself, it would be like I don't know at all where a town is and say "I don't know where it is, but I'll get there soon"...


In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.
  • Comment on Re^2: How much Perl6 have we got? (take 2)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: How much Perl6 have we got? (take 2)
by derby (Abbot) on May 11, 2007 at 16:15 UTC

    Hmmm ... I think the closest english word may be prognosticate. I've never really heard or used it for software estimation (I mostly hear it for sports wagering) but it sure fits.

    So duff, would you be happy to call yourself a perl6 prognosticator?


      From the very same page you linked, I think that the word s that fit best are in the Thesaurus section, and namely:

      hazard, guess, venture, pretend - put forward, of a guess, in spite of possible refutation;

      I think that hazard is the word closest to what I meant to say


      In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.

      Sure. "Perl 6 prognosticator" is fine by me :-)

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://614946]
[stevieb]: I don't know what you mean. I write the code in C/C++ that accesses the ICs per the datasheet, wrap it for Perl, then use them. My code ensures that the functions/methods from Perl do the right thing for the chips/sensors etc
[stevieb]: At least that's what I'm working on right now. I've also been updating my automated test software Test::BrewBuild so it handles this work properly. It's not really easy meshing high level languages with low-level hardware :)

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chilling in the Monastery: (6)
As of 2017-06-25 23:08 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    How many monitors do you use while coding?

    Results (572 votes). Check out past polls.