http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=928533


in reply to Re^2: Each Core Perl Bug report costs USD 125
in thread Each Core Perl Bug report costs USD 125

I presume the major thing holding this approach back is that there are not that many people with knowledge of C and Perl internals who are willing and available to work on Perl.

Thats not how it was 5 years ago or even 10 years ago. The community of Perl has dropped and I have seen no major steps of recovery. Since Python and PHP have taken over the programing market, Perl jobs have turned into Ruby, Python or PHP.

I guess company's like their programs made by languages that dont have internal community issues.
  • Comment on Re^3: Each Core Perl Bug report costs USD 125

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Each Core Perl Bug report costs USD 125
by sundialsvc4 (Abbot) on Sep 29, 2011 at 12:02 UTC

    Of course such a statement is mere conjecture.   “The programming market” that you speak of so casually is quite vast, incorporating many undertakings, of which Web Pages are only but one very tiny slice.   (It may be the only one that you see and you regularly interact with, but the entire iceberg is enormous.)   In every case, the thing that is of true business importance and value is the vast amount of existing software that has been developed in each language.   The language-system itself is merely the enabler.

    Perl-5 is an obviously-mature software system.   (So are the other two languages you mention.)   You can work with any of them for years and never encounter any of the currently open bugs ... which is not to establish that they need not be fixed, but to establish the amount of dedicated effort and funds that might require to be allocated to the task right now.   (We’re certainly getting high-quality work done at a bargain-basement price, to the betterment of literally everyone.   Thank you.)

    (Specious jab at the community:   completely ignored.   Neither programming languages nor the professionals who use them have anything to prove to one another...)