Slashdot Mirror
MacPerl 5.6.1 Released
pudge (apple.slashdot.org editor and MacPerl Maintainer) writes "MacPerl 5.6.1r1 is the first release of MacPerl in four years. It is now based on perl 5.6.1 -- actually on the latest unreleased 5.6 sources, so MacPerl is the most advanced release of perl ever -- and support for MacPerl is now in the perl core, for both 5.6 and 5.8. MacPerl can also be built entirely with freely available software. And, like its predecessor, it runs on Mac OS X under the Classic environment. Read the announcement, and see macperldelta for details on what's changed."
MacPerl may be needed for pre-X Mac OS, but what's the point of running a port of perl to a legacy environment? The "real" perl runs on Mac OS X without any porting. Why anyone would waste time and resources running it under Classic is beyond me.
It is now based on perl 5.6.1 -- actually on the latest unreleased 5.6 sources, so MacPerl is the most advanced release of perl ever
"Most advanced" is often the antithesis of "most stable". I'd be a little leery about using it until it's been hammered on a bit.
"Where shall the word be found, where will the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence." -T.S. Eliot
Highlights In MacPerl 5.6.1 shows updates include:
How relevant is this? I found the inability to fork subprocesses, and the general "anti-command-line" tendencies of applications on the Mac OS, to make Mac Perl's usefullness much diminished compared to traditional unix environments. In many respects, I think AppleScript is the more effective scripting language for the classic Mac OS, although certainly it's not as fun or easy to work with as Perl (speaking from experience someone who's worked with both.)
Does anyone out there actually use Mac Perl for major development?
MacPerl drove me nuts under the old MacOS. I had to do some perl development and I needed to use some database modules that were unstable ondr MacOS. I tried to use them under Windows using ActiveState, but there the modules were just not available. I ended up HAVING to learn to use Linux (and install) in order to get my work done.
Since OS X has perl, I do my perl development on my Mac again. It's good to see MacPerl being developed, but its usefulness has diminished -- the target audience uses an operating system that is being phased out.
t'nera semordnilap
it's ok for Classic (OS 9) i guess. under OS X you can just use the regular Perl sources... in fact /usr/bin/perl is preinstalled.
:)
one might say that with the advent of OS 9, *MacPerl is dying
Cretin - a powerful and flexible CD reencoder
Why do I need this? Does this offer anything that the version of perl included with Mac OS X doesn't?
Somewhere in the heavens... they are waiting.
MacPerl runs in Classic mode on OSX, a known resource hog. Now, I'm under the impression that a *nix flavor of perl would run just fine on OSX's *nix booty.
Hence I ask (serious question), is there any reason an OSX user would even consider using MacPerl over a (seemingly more native to OSX) *nix Perl??
Good lord! The most advanced Perl EVER ?? I'm running out to buy a Mac RIGHT NOW.
I mean, come on guys... I know Mac people are used to being second class citizens as far as getting the latest releases of software, but this is just... embarrassing.
Every once in a while, the Mac community gets something first, and they start crowing like I can't believe. Have some self respect, for god's sake.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Perl 5.6 is included with OS X. You can run scripts from the terminal. Go here for more info from the apple website
Are there any plans underway to give Perl acces to Aqua, like with Perl/Tk or GTKPerl? I'd really like to be able to write perl scripts with simple, non-XFree86 GUIs on OSX, the way I can use various toolboxes on Unix to create GUIs.
ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
--
Damn the Emperor!
MacPerl is not an Apple product. Also, I believe your definition of "vaporware" is incorrect:
Vaporware is software or hardware that is either (1) announced or mentioned publicly in order to influence customers to defer
buying competitors' products or (2) late being delivered for whatever reason. Most computer companies have from time to time
delivered vaporware, either by calculation or unintentionally.
t'nera semordnilap
This is great news. When I was writing automated backup scripts for our office macs, I turned to the old release of MacPERL after learning what a convoluted piece of garbage AppleScript was...
Congratulations to the MacPERL people
"Why not just port the OSX version to have the Mac:: modules? Why use the classic version at all? What's the point?" Etc, etc, etc. Well guess what, people, *not* *everybody* *uses* *OSX*. My little blueberry ibook would be crushed under the load of Aqua, and it hums along just fine with "classic", "old", "decript", OS9. And I use MacPerl, because I can hack around with it on road trips and write nifty stuff like "count the license plates" to keep my kids entertained. Sheesh, you'd think that there was no such thing as an old macintosh out there....
<plug>This is great news for Ethernet MP3 player
The open development team behind the SliMP3 has created one of largest Perl programs in history. We've always ensured that the software is easy to install, and supports as many platforms as possible. That means we have to do certain things like avoiding fork(), and making sure that the Time::HiRes module is available with the distribution, pre-compiled for many architectures. We also deal with the path name differences between Windows and Unix. Those are the main differences - there are about a half dozen other little things, but all in all Perl is a great language and runs well on all platforms.
Version 1.0 of our software *was* compatible with MacOS9. We dropped support for OS9 after that, due to the numerous limitations and problems with the outdated MacPerl. OSX has never been a problem, because it's just Unix and it comes with Perl 5.6.1.
However, now that MacPerl 5.6.1 is available, there is a good chance that we'll be able to get the product working on MacOS Classic again. I am starting work on it today!
Hooray for the MacPerl team!
It is now based on perl 5.6.1 -- actually on the latest unreleased 5.6 sources, so MacPerl is the most advanced release of perl ever
Surely you mean this is the most advanced release of perl ever for the Mac, as the developer's release is at 5.7.3.
Yes, you are mischaracterizing it. It is not even clear to me exactly what you want "fixed," but let's make one thing clear: there is exactly NO REASON to port MacPerl to Mac OS X. The bulk of your post seems to be asking for this, and yet there is NO REASON to ever do it. That is why it is not being done.
... what's up with that?)
What you want is not a ported MacPerl, it is access to the Carbon API from perl on Mac OS X. Those are two different things. And in your post you presume unreasonable presumptions about this. As you clearly don't understand quite a few things, perhaps you should ask questions -- and heck, even read the existing responses that answer many of the questions you should be asking -- instead of making such presumptions.
(It's odd you say you can't complain, and then you complain
Some things you got wrong: as noted, there is no reason to Carbonize MacPerl. Further, there is no such possible thing as a port to Cocoa. The MacPerl access to the Mac OS API is based on Carbon; anything related to Cocoa wouldn't be a port, it would be a separate project. There are also several other alternatives beside OSXMacPerl, including, as noted in other posts, a project I am involved in to provide the Carbon API, which would work in both Mac OS and Mac OS X. Some of the alternatives even have working code that you could use today.
You also presume that my time would be better spent on Mac OS X, that I am "hiding my head in the sand." This is, as a point of fact, completely false. I don't use Mac OS X regularly, and won't use it regularly for the forseeable future. I am, and will continue to be, far more efficient using Mac OS than Mac OS X, and until that changes, cannot consider moving to Mac OS X a viable option. In light of that fact, it is somewhat amazing that I have actually spent as much time on Mac OS X as I have, doing some of the things you say I've not been doing. But the main point is that it is unreasonable for me to spend the majority of my spare time developing for a platform that I won't be using regularly any time soon. My time is mine, and I cannot fathom why anyone would gripe about how I use it.