http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=1212996


in reply to Re^7: Curious about Perl's strengths in 2018
in thread Curious about Perl's strengths in 2018

I think this view proves my point of a missing overall strategy.
But you've completely failed to address where, in my previous post, I pointed out that having a strategy won't help a jot. If you disagree, please clearly explain where my argument falls down.

Dave.

  • Comment on Re^8: Curious about Perl's strengths in 2018

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^9: Curious about Perl's strengths in 2018
by LanX (Archbishop) on Apr 17, 2018 at 08:39 UTC
    I'm very busy for the rest of the week, so I can't elaborate much for the moment.

    My "management strategy" would be to get people involved.

    • Formulating vision/goal to achieve, like Perl 6 semantics with named variables.
    • Prioritizing features (like clarity over speed)
    • Explaining difficulties
    • Asking for contributions
    • Possibly offering a grant and steering competition

    I think many people would like to contribute if they understood the system better.

    Cheers Rolf
    (addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)
    Wikisyntax for the Monastery

      My "management strategy" would be to get people involved.
      Well, that's very nice and all that, but it's been tried before, many times, in many different ways, under various leaderships. And to a certain extent it's worked. Apart from Abigail, none of the 10 top committers in 2017 was around in 2000, so we've all been recruited since.
      I think many people would like to contribute if they understood the system better.
      There is copious documentation on the perl internals, and people on p5p are always willing to help answer questions. But fundamentally, perl is an exceedingly complex language, with many weird and wonderful features (like ties) all interacting with each other in unexpected and exponentially complex ways. To a large extent the internals are complex because they reflect this. They're also complex because they were originally written that way. And because much of the internals are exposed via the XS API (and since XS can and sometimes does access non-API internals too) it's very hard to rewrite the internals into a clean, modern form that would be easy to learn, without breaking everything; even if we had the manpower to do so.

      Dave.

        Thanks, but I don't know how these things apply to subroutine signatures.

        For instance how does the XS interface hinder the implementation of proper signatures?

        Cheers Rolf
        (addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)
        Wikisyntax for the Monastery