Slashdot Mirror
Perl 6 Synopsis 5
XaXXon writes: "perl.com has Synopsis 5 for Perl 6 up. It's a brief overview of all the changes made in Larry Wall's Apocalypse 5. Lots of stuff about the new regex syntax. I must admit, however, that I'm getting tired of reading about perl 6 -- I want to start using it." We posted Larry Wall's 5th Apocalypse in May.
BTW PERL sucks
Migor is VERY angry. Migor has identified a creature worse then the common household troll.
Migor calles them retarded mods because they are retarded in their very own brain. They are stupid and their brains should be harvested for suppliments to kitty litter. They mod down insightful and informitive comments because they don't understand them, or worse, are too stupid to reconize the humor.
Migor is here to help. Migor will keep posting to waste those mod's points so real mods can mod up the good comments.
Migor will eat your soul
... I'll finally be able to make sense of my perl code after I write it?
~geogeek
Keep those clit faggots at bay, brother!
php is better.
I am a frequent visitor to slashdot and also an avid supporter of anonymous free speech online. However I noticed something VERY ODD regarding slashdot. I use ad-aware on my Windows XP system, and it found the double click cookie. Here is a summery of the doubleclick SPYWARE cookie from pest patrol:
===
A spyware cookie. Cookie is used to track unique visitors to many different sites, and their "preferences."
Online ad company DoubleClick used Web bugs that could communicate with cookies from its Web site. The cookies then revealed past online behavior, even home addresses, IP addresses, and phone numbers to the bugs, and the bugs sent that information straight back to DoubleClick.
A company can also use the bugs to tie cookie histories to personal identifying information, such as your phone number and address. In fact, a California woman sued DoubleClick for just that behavior. The company bought another firm, Abacus Direct, which holds detailed consumer profiles on more than 90 percent of U.S. households. DoubleClick cross-referenced its spyware results with that database to compile surprisingly personal profiles
===
As one can see double click is a DANGEROUS piece of spyware, which totally removes privacy and hijacks ones computer and all it's information. After I removed the doubleclick TROJAN from my otherwise secure and updated winXP pc I went to slashdot and noticed I WAS LOGGED OUT. Slashdot also uses SECRET 1 pixel gifs in it's advertising system.
The only answer is that slashdot is WORKING WITH DOUBLECLICK's spyware software and selling millions of personal profiles of its users to fund it's OTHERWISE UNPROFITABLE business. I find this to be detestable and immoral behavior especially for a site that claims it supports peoples RIGHTS TO PRIVACY. My only course of action is to use other linux resource sites and to make sure slashdot.org is BLACKLISTED as a spyware-installing site. It is a sad, sad day when you cannot visit a freedom-loving site without having your computer HIJACKED.
show your true colors and respond to this journal showing that you support the FIGHT to end slashdot spyware!
Perl 6 seems to be a whole new camel. This one's definitely uglier and has two humps.
The Perl community seems to have become something of an inbred group where the only ideas come from people who have been using Perl exclusively for years. While this may be fine for a while, the end result is a jumble of personal preferences and half-baked ideas.
I have been pwned because my
Migor is angry. Migor has identified a creature worse then the common household troll.
Migor calles them retarded mods. They are evil. They mod down insightful and informitive comments because they don't understand them, or worse, are too stupid to reconize the humor.
Migor is here to help. Migor will keep posting to waste those mod's points so real mods can mod up the good comments.
The Internet is generally stupid
Well, go right ahead. From the Parrot VM, the Perl6 engine, page:
Use Perl6--Write some Parrot assembly, and help out!Click here or here.
Looks like a reference in some holy book.
Fuck the Palestinian war criminals! Muslim assholes fuck off and die!
...for open source companies in general, still disaster?
As Hollywood prepares to release the new film, "Scooby Doo," we think it's important for Christians to understand some of the hidden messages in the cartoon series that Landover Baptist Creation Scientists and Youth Directors have spent the last 30 years of their lives uncovering. It goes without saying that most Christians already know that the term, "Scooby Doo," was adopted by the homosexual community in the late 1970's. "Scooby Doo" is Sodomite slang for "feces roll." There is no easy way of saying this, but a "feces roll" is when a group of naked homosexual "men" get together in a public park, lay out a large plastic mat, poop all over it, and roll around in it until they have orgasms or are busted by the police. Some homosexuals save their feces in plastic bags and keep them in the refrigerator for weeks to prepare for such an event.
One doesn't have to look too far to see why the homosexual community was so quick in adopting "Scooby Doo." The cartoon is chock full of decadence. It really doesn't take a theologian to see that each character in the cartoon series represents a perverse member of society. There is "Shaggy," a skinny junkie who is always sleepy, hungry, and paranoid. If you look closely enough, you can actually see the needle marks on his arms where he would inject a liquified form of "scooby snacks" which were really nothing more than a mixture of cocaine and heroin. Shaggy would even feed the dog (which is G-o-d spelled backwards and an occult way of referring to Satan) these cocktails as well. At times, Shaggy would be so high, he would even think the dog was talking to him.
Another character in the series, Thelma, the little bull-dyke, represents the feminist movement. Hollywood makes everyone's job easier here because they never try to hide the fact that feminists are nothing more than ugly-looking women with glasses who are always reading books and bossing people around. Our lone Christian mole in Hollywood tells us that executives were even considering talk show host and human hippo, Rosie O'Donnell, for the role of Thelma.
In the character of Fred, we are subjected to a cartoon depiction of the typical homosexual male. His choice in clothing alone is enough to raise the eyebrows of any concerned Christian parent. Further evidence exists in his lack of interest in the character of Daphney, a female prostitute along for the ride who never has anything signficant to offer the group other than a harlot's smile and, sadly, unclothed cartoon legs that Landover Baptist Youth Director, Richard N. Moff, reports, "cause arousal in young boys even before they reach puberty."
The characters of "Scooby Doo" travel in a van (an enclosed vehichle suggesting deviant activity occuring within) from town to town looking for ghosts and witches and consulting with people who are familair with spirits. It's always been a carefully packaged television program that introduces innocent young children to the occult. We could go on about countless Christian horror stories where grown adults fall prostate on the altar of Jesus and plead His precious blood over addictions to homosexuality, witchcraft, beastiality, drugs, prostitution, cartoon pornography, and liberalism that can all be traced back to being seduced by the Scooby Doo cartoon series as a child, but entire books could be written on the subject.
We place this message of Christian love and experience here only because we know that Hollywood is preparing to unleash this terror from Hell on an already suffering Christian Nation. We urge you to protest vocally, and protest in silence by putting the $7 you would have paid to see the film, "Scooby Doo," into the offering plate at your local Bible-believing Baptist Church on Sunday morning. Thank you.
Perl is simply a fux0ring ugly so-called language.
For instance there is now OO COBOL but the only people that use it are COBOL programmers who are stuck, perhaps because of their company's dictates, perhaps by choice, with COBOL. In the same way perl may be heading towards irrelevance wrt "mainstream" language. I've written commercial perl in the past, it was a pain then and it's still a pain now. The thing is that now there are alternative languages in the same space (python, ruby etc., php for web side) that do the "perl thing" better than perl.
Perl was great, it introduced many people to programming, just like COBOL did. But now it's time to move on. To move on to languages that learnt from perl, that improved on it, that don't have to drag around a syntax and culture that values neat tricks and trying to guess what the programmer really meant over providing the needed building blocks and letting you build code that does what you say, not what it thinks it heard you say. Or even, dare I say it, to move on to languages outside the perl family for some programming and choose the right tool for the job for a change.
I'd prefer to think of this as provocative rather than a flame, there is a difference you know.
For all of the hub bub and brouhahah, I think after it is released and people start to explore all the new (and old) features, folks are going to find Perl 6 an amazing tool that improves on an already amazing tool set.
With all of the flame wars regarding Perl/Python/Ruby (like triplets calling each other ugly), it's good to see Perl continuing to innovate, improve and set a brisk pace for others to follow.
-- My choice of computing platform is a symbol of my individuality and belief in personal freedom.
Today's Software and IT industries are plagued by programming errors. While some of these errors are the result of illegal use of non-Microsoft software on rogue networks, the majority of problems stem from difficulties in mingling code of different programming languages.
Standarization on the best-of-breed programming language, C++, would undoubtedly reduce errors in software.
In this comment, I seek to dispel the myth that non-C++ languages are beneficial in proper Software Engineering. I outline how standardization on the C++ language can strengthen your corporation's bottom line. And I describe how to contact the men in Congress to have C++ use finally made legally mandatory.
C++, a programming language invented by Lucent's Bjarney Strupstrup in 1995, has been hailed as a God-send to Computer Science since its creation. Based on Richie Kerninghan's language "C+", C++ brought several previously-theoretical programming languages features to the mainstream:
Church-Rosser Compliance
Known as "multiple inheritance" in the programming world and as "being Church-Rosser" in academia, C++'s compliance to this IEEE standard immediately placed it head-and-shoulders above other languages. "Churrossity" allows programmers to use blocks of code, called "objects," in place of other blocks of code ("arrays".) The layman can think of this as "allowing 'new' code to 'run' old code." This advance has not been possible in previous logic-based languages such as Ada.
Multi-Byte Characters
C++ allowed use of "Beaster," a subset of Microsoft's COM ("Common Object Model") windowing layer. The Beaster system allows non-English-speakers such as the Welsh to use computing technology, as it could redirect the signals used to display non-English characters on a computer's monitor screen or laser printer. It is also useful in helping the blind, who speak a specialized subset of English called "ALS."
Pass-By-Text
A non-recursive pass-by-text mechanism existed in Kerninghan's C+, called "macro facility." But Strupstrup did Kerninghan one better with the "String Template Loader" variable passing mechanism, which allowed text to be passed to procedures at run-time. This sped up code execution times, as code could be compiled while the user was running the program. This eliminated speed loss caused by incompatibility from obselete computer chips (Motorola and ADM.)
The superiority of C++ over other languages should be obvious. But is switching to it from other languages possible in your corporation? Astute observers will note that the eco-terrorist group FSF produces a C++ compiler called "DJGPP." Under President Bush's War on Terror, any organization supporting a terrorist organization is recursively itself a terrorist organization.
Corporations needn't worry. Microsoft has its own C++ offering, "Visual Studio." As an added bonus, Microsoft Visual Studio is highly standards compliant. It features a visual programming interface, and several features not found elsewhere (such as a visual debugger and an AOL instant messanger client called "Windows Messaging".)
But these advantages can only be realized if code written in inferior languages can be kept from polluting the inter-web eco-space. When compilers for other languages are available, low-level managers are tempted to write code in them. Why? Often times, managers are brought up from the ranks of Software Engineers, and thus lack an Executive's sense for using the right tool for the job. When these managers write code in a jungled zoo of languages, code in one program is unable to interact with code from another program (churrossity.) Only by standardizing on C++ can all programs run together smoothly. Using C++ to eliminate software errors will jump-start the sagging technology industry. This will boost our economy as a whole, which in turn will help us to win the War on Terror.
The effort to legally mandate this has been going on for a while. But it needs your help. Even the smallest person, such as a reader of this site, can make a difference with his Congressman. Congressmen are kept highly versed in technical issues by lobbyists from Microsoft and Intel. But without strong grassroots input, the men of Congress and the Senate are powerless to heed the corporations' pleas.
Please, I urge you to visit the Congress and the White House to help bring this important movement to its fruition.
Wall has changed the language too much and now more regex changes. Like Pascal when major updates became Modula or later Oberon. Original Pascal was left to evolve on it own. Same with Turbo Pascal when Borland heavily changed it they changed the name to Delphi. Call Perl 6 the new beast that it is.
It seems to me like egos are getting in the way of efficiency here. After all, why re-invent the wheel when we already have python ? Why break all those working perl scripts ?
Ego is the enemy of open source, and here we see why.
long may you plover
If ya are I'd like some to try.
I am a frequent visitor to slashdot and also an avid supporter of anonymous free speech online. However I noticed something VERY ODD regarding slashdot. I use ad-aware on my Windows XP system, and it found the double click cookie. Here is a summery of the doubleclick SPYWARE cookie from pest patrol:
===
A spyware cookie. Cookie is used to track unique visitors to many different sites, and their "preferences."
Online ad company DoubleClick used Web bugs that could communicate with cookies from its Web site. The cookies then revealed past online behavior, even home addresses, IP addresses, and phone numbers to the bugs, and the bugs sent that information straight back to DoubleClick.
A company can also use the bugs to tie cookie histories to personal identifying information, such as your phone number and address. In fact, a California woman sued DoubleClick for just that behavior. The company bought another firm, Abacus Direct, which holds detailed consumer profiles on more than 90 percent of U.S. households. DoubleClick cross-referenced its spyware results with that database to compile surprisingly personal profiles
===
As one can see double click is a DANGEROUS piece of spyware, which totally removes privacy and hijacks ones computer and all it's information. After I removed the doubleclick TROJAN from my otherwise secure and updated winXP pc I went to slashdot and noticed I WAS LOGGED OUT. Slashdot also uses SECRET 1 pixel gifs in it's advertising system.
The only answer is that slashdot is WORKING WITH DOUBLECLICK's spyware software and selling millions of personal profiles of its users to fund it's OTHERWISE UNPROFITABLE business. I find this to be detestable and immoral behavior especially for a site that claims it supports peoples RIGHTS TO PRIVACY. My only course of action is to use other linux resource sites and to make sure slashdot.org is BLACKLISTED as a spyware-installing site. It is a sad, sad day when you cannot visit a freedom-loving site without having your computer HIJACKED.
show your true colors and respond to this journal showing that you support the FIGHT to end slashdot spyware!
dont call yourself a troll and dont say "our troll community" because you AC's are disgrace enough. wont login cuz YOU'RE worried about karma. BAH! YHBT HAND kthx
#sarcasm# Yeah!!! Just what we need more RegEx fragmentation #/sarcasm#
.
Honestly, RegEx hasn't changed much since awk and when it did, Perl usually led the way. The changes though usually just added features or tweaks, my RegEx still basically looked the same though whether I used VIM, Python, ASP, C++, Perl,
Shortly after reading the changes, I was aghast. Sure some of the changes make sense but some are going completely against RegEx as we know them now (getting rid of character classes for one []) . Sure you can use the p5 modifier or do the funky syntax to use [] but the issue is its a radical change.
This is a bad thing(tm). This is going to force all us RegEx people who currently using 4 or 5 different RegEx tools to not only learn minor differences based on each app, but we will be forcec to learn a COMPLETE DIFFERENT subset of RegEx syntax incompatible with anything else.
Now wait you say, Perl has always led the way and other tools seem to use perl compatable RegEx libraries. Not so with Perl6. Have floated this question out on a couple developer lists (PHP for one) and everybody is saying, Perl 6 RegEx support isn't going to happen. They are all happy with the current state of RegEx's. This is especially go to cause hell with PHP's perl_regex functions. PHP has stated they are not going to support Perl6 RegEx. Real perl_regex compatible then huh.
Some the Perl6 changes are pretty good for RegEx, but the complete drop of support for character clases just isn't a good thing (tm).
My 2cents (who is glad at least Larry added the P5 modifier)
De Oppresso Liber
I guess the Christians are going to be waving banners over the naming of this one. Are they going to sue for false advertising when they realize this isn't the Apocalypse the Bible spoke of?
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
and another thing, STFU FAGG0AT!
I used to write a lot of Perl scripts and libraries. But I've been cutting back and using other scripting languages instead. Perl6 looks like it would not be a pleasant transition from Perl5; I don't want to have to learn a new, idiosyncratic language every major release. If some of the features in Perl6 turn out to be useful (like the new regex syntax), they will make it as libraries into other languages.
I used to be a big fan of Perl, but I've found that I can typically code any particular application much more quickly using PHP compiled for command-line operation.
Is it just me, or have other's found this? Also, the performance of command-line PHP is quite acceptable.
Only idiots believe that the design of programming languages and other tools, and the resulting choices among these tools, are matters of taste.
Taste is a deciding factor only when everything else is equal, which it almost never is. The intelligent look at the inherent technical merits of a tool, and of course other considerations, such as quality and availability of implementations targetting a given set of platforms.
Perl is, technically, a crap of a language, and everyone knows it. This is not a statement of taste, like someone ``dissing'' your favorite band.
YOU ARE GAY!
I can't find the article about the terror CEO's of a DotCom; anyone got the link?
Clarification:
... some syntax seems essential and such, should be unchanging .+*()[] and later {}? ... This modifiers seem to be the core basic syntax of all regex engines. What next, to much a single character we replace . with <!.!> (not real code), or how about * with <%many_not_zero%> ... my point it [] is basic syntax, it doesnt' need changing.
.... Perl 6 is what?
... this seems to me to look like [^[:alpha:]^[:num:]^.*] which is completely wrong (and doens't work)
Never said they are going away. I said you now have to do some completely odd funky syntax to do character classes as we know them.
<[a-z_]> <--sure its only the addition of <> (well not really, because it soon starts looking completely unlike RegEx... [^a-b] compared to <-[a-b]> BUT character classes have alway as long as I have know been []
Now here is my fun Perl6 question.
Before I could do [^[:alpha:][:num:].*]
<-alpha><-num><-[.*]> isn't correct since that is not ONE character class.
<<-alpha><-num><-[.*]>> maybe? (though it also doesnt' look right)
De Oppresso Liber
First - the myths, untruths etc that have sprung up so far.
Perl6 is not backwards-compatible with Perl5 - uhm, yes it is. All your perl5 scripts will compile.
Why not contribute to phython or [insert other language here] well, python will compile through Parrot too, so who cares? If you like Python, write in Python. I prefer $%&? syntax to whitespace-as-syntax, but each to their own, but that is the joy of Parrot. Think .Net CLR without the so-far unfounded feeling that M$ are doing something underhand and nasty that you can't put your finger on. Before someone replies with "Why not just use the CLR instead of Parrot"? bear in mind this has been done to death already. It's in the FAQ, read first, flame later.
But why Perl? Okay, so it can be write-only. But this is only because of the flexibility, There Is More Than One Way To Do It. This includes obfuscated code, and plain unreadable alien transmissions. However - if you're writing code only you will ever see, then use the short-cuts. If you are writing code that needs to be maintained, then YOU the developer have the responsibility to ensure it is readable.
Heck, you could always use english; - but this is perl, you can also code in Latin, or, uhm, Klingon.
Perl is simply the most flexible language out there IMHO. If you're a sysadmin, you will have the Camel and the cookbook on your desk. Our entire environment is held together with Perl. Half the Internet is running on Perl. A dead language? Sheesh, Perl is dead, long live Perl.
If there is anything that does worry me about perl6, it is that it is becomiung too powerful, and too encompassing - it is important that the balance is maintained whereby it remains the Swiss Army Knife of languages, that it remains as easy for the casual Perl programmer to keep getting their job done with simple scripts as it is to create large projects.
Worst...update...ever...
He also goes on to note that the CLR could be a pluggable backend for Parrot to export to.
What a wussy response. So what you're saying is that those languages are all good, except when they're not.
I love Intercal because it destroys all the "they're all very nice" language relativity arguments. Here's a language that's specifically designed to be as annoying as possible. I dare you to advocate Intercal in the same way you did above.
Both the PHP language and its implementation have significant problems. Regular users of PHP already have their own list of language design annoyances ("it has to be a global??") and you can see some of the implementation problems here. You will note PHP's implementation getting beaten by Tcl, gawk, xemacs, and njs. :-(
PHP would have been better off if the implementors had used an existing language like Lua (80k of x86 code for standalone interpreter+core libraries!) and focused on the embedding features unique to the application area.
Well, the grammar/regex isomorphic to class/method _is_ interesting - about the only other language where one could achieve that degree of cleverness and finish before the heat death of the universe is Common Lisp... At least in CL, it'd be readable. Lots of parentheses, but readable...
I must admit to only just having gained a handle on some of the more esoteric features of Perl 5 regex. But I have a definite opinion on the use of the /x modifier on regex - contrary to (what seems like) popular belief, I find it makes regex harder to read, not easier.
Having to mentally scroll a line after each token impairs my parsing of the regex as a whole. It seems much easier to me to compare a sample of the input to the regex, and see how it looks. I realise it won't be mandatory to lay regexes out like this in Perl 6, but it worries me that this is seen as good programming practise. Don't even get me started on people who comment after every token...
Still, there's hope that the introduction of this modifer as the default will work against this mindset, rather than for it. Perhaps with its common usage will come enlightenment amongst the Perl posse. I also notice that Larry doesn't use the monstrously verbose regex form during his Apocalypse. So I'm not really sure whether this is a good or a bad thing - but I'm certain that people in the Perl community need to stop preaching that excessive commenting of regexes makes for maintainable code.
(This probably should have been posted in response to the original Apocalypse 5 thread. Tough titty. BTW, I thought Slashdot would wait for the Exegesis, and how come this is a few days late. Bah, humbug.)
You look beautiful! Incidentally, my favourite artist is Picasso.
Perl has always had ugly points, but regular expressions were always concise and well-known. And now Wall's ramblings about how he wants to change regular expressions are longer than the entire section about them in the camel book. Doesn't this strike anyone else as ridiclous? Perhaps too many special cases and too many borrowed extensions are being thrown into the language. What an ugly mess it is becoming.
I'm not a big Python fan, but now I'm wondering why I shouldn't just switch to Python now and save myself the grief of having to switch to a completely new Perl-like language later.
Seems to be a lot of Perl bashers. Surprising.
:-).
Where I work Perl helps us with System Integration, fast scripting, production reports, database connectivity where speed of writing the application and flexibility in changing that application quickly are important, web sites for change control systems, bug reporting systems, etc. and much much more.
If speed of creating the application and flexibility of changing that application need to be blazingling fast Perl is the choice. If Perl is not going to provide the application speed you need then use C or C++. That is why Perl is written in C
If the Perl code you are reading isn't readible it probably had to be written too fast for the programmer to accout for that or else the programmer simply didn't care. Perl is the most flexible language ever and it can be the most readible if some care is taken. Especially in a smaller size applications.
If the perl 6 regex's have real benefits over the old style of regex's, then everyone else will switch over. Sure it will take a while, but then what improvements in life ever happened instantly?
They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. -- C. Sagan
While there are countless reasons to adopt Microsoft Visual J#(TM) .NET, these 10 reasons top the list.
.NET can be used by Java-language developers immediately with almost no learning curve.
.NET provides developers with a modern and intuitive object-based type system that eliminates the need for complex and error-inducing pointer and template features found in other languages.
.NET Framework .NET provides developers with access to the Microsoft .NET Framework, a robust, thread-safe library of collection classes, networking functionality, data access classes, and more.
.NET allows developers to deploy and consume rich, interactive XML Web services that reduce development time by enabling software aggregation from any platform.
.NET provides a low-cost route to migrate your Java programs and programmers to .NET-connected technologies and applications.
.NET IDE .NET provides developers with the award-winning Visual Studio .NET integrated development environment (IDE), which includes support for Task Lists, Property Editors, Microsoft IntelliSense®, Forms Designers, and much more.
Number 1
Familiar Language Syntax
If you are already familiar with the syntax of the Java language, why learn anything else? Microsoft Visual J#
Number 2
Multi-Language Aware
Integrate your applications directly with components, services, and classes written in other languages.
Number 3
Object-based Type System
Visual J#
Number 4
Access to the Microsoft
Visual J#
Number 5
Interactive XML Web Services
Visual J#
Number 6
Java Investment Protection
Visual J#
Number 7
Visual Studio
Visual J#
Number 8
Powerful Windows-based Applications
The new Microsoft Windows® Forms Designer enables developers to get their desktop applications to market in less time. New features include control anchoring and docking to eliminate the need for complex resize code, the in-place menu editor to deliver WYSIWYG menu creation, and the tab order editor to provide rapid application development (RAD) organization of controls.
Number 9
Easy Web-based Application Development
Using new Web Forms, you can easily build true thin-client Web-based applications that intelligently render on any browser and on any platform. Web Forms deliver a RAD programming experience for the creation of great Web-based applications. The new HTML Designer delivers IntelliSense statement completion for HTML tags and the separation of user interface (UI) and code enable more efficient team-based development.
Number 10
Simple Reliable Deployment
"No-touch" deployment features make application installation as easy as copying software onto the disk drives of client machines or to the servers in your data center. New applications won't interfere with existing applications. Rich Windows interfaces, once an operational problem, can now be easily installed and serviced using the new Windows Forms technology.
and I'm about to drop it altogether - both 5 and 6. Franky, coding Perl can be fun, but maintaining and debugging the code written by somebody else - isn't. THis is the implication of having the language with 'the same thing can be done in a 1000 different ways' and the language whose design mostly depends on Larry's whims - and remember that Larry is a linguist by education, and apparently he has somewhat limited understanding of all the issues concerning the 'production quality' language. So - I'll be taking a closer look to apparently minimalistic and restricted Python. Cheers.
Many people say Perl is too big, has too many features, is too complicated, etc. This is simply false. Perl has tons of features, but, more than any other language I have ever used, you can use as little or as much of it as you want. You can pick up a Perl book and start writing Perl code in 15 minutes.
Perl is ugly, hard to read, "write only", etc. This is complete horseshit, probably stemming from lack of experience with using Perl. Perl is very easy to write and read. Where I work, I have a co-worker who is not a programer. He learned Pascal years ago, but did not do any real coding until recently. Despite this, he can fairly easily read and modify my code. Yet, he can't read or modify my C/C++ code at all, and it's usually very readable, very clean, simple and concise.
PHP/Python is better. A lot of people like to compare Perl to PHP and Python. Neither are "better", there really is no such thing. PHP is for web developers, and Perl can do everything PHP can do in nearly the exact same ways. Take a look at CPAN, there are so many Perl modules for use with Apache and web development in general that Perl is far, far more capable of a web programming language than PHP(IMO anyway). And Python, I've seen some absolutely fantastic stuff written in Python, but I hate Python, because it gives me a frickin headache. I cannot read/write Python, the lack of braces, indentation as syntax is just horrible on my eyes. Perhaps I'm slightly dyslexic or something, but when I'm looking at a page of Python code it all starts to swim and I cannot tell where each code block begins and ends.
Now don't get me wrong, Perl isn't perfect. There are some things that bother me about Perl 5. # for comments, not bad but I really wish I could use C and C++ style comments in my Perl code. A bunch of #'s just look rather ugly. Threads, Perl 6 will have decent thread support from what I understand, I wish Perl 5 did, luckily for me everything I use Perl for I can fairly easily use multiple proceses instead, still would be nice though.
I for one am looking forward to Perl 6. There will definately be a learning curve, but at least it will run most scripts without modification, will make upgrading much easier.
Oh wait... this is /., it's easier to get modded up for bashing something... ok... Microsoft sucks! ;-)
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
I don't get why people whine about obvious improvment in regexp engine. First of all: there always p5 modifier to turn on compatibility mode. Moreover do not afraid of complexity of new regexps. You don't have to use all features! Simple things are still easy to do (and even easier). The best thing about new regexps is that they make previously impossible possible.
--
Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/)
All others stay away...
What a load of crap. If it was to Jesus, why is some of it addressed to the seven churches?
You should reread the whole book again.
nice to see something so influential having a go at fixing regular expressions.
If you hate Java as unscalable proprietary lang then use either Python or CLOS/Lisp.
For those who argue about security of object attribute access - that has nothing to do with OOP and with security either. It's just a marketing blob and nothing useful. Hence, Python and CLOS/Lisp are still the choice.
Finally, CLOS/Lisp has not enough portable GUI libraries. Scheme is not OOP lang either. Thus we've left alone with Python. Portable open-source scalable stable-as-old and modern-as improved good OOP (and some FP!) lang Pyhton.
Less is more !
Just thought I'd rerun my previous comment producing post. Despite all of the ranting that generated I think I'll stick with my contention that Perl is COBOL for the 21st Century. In this respect perhaps perl 6 is going to be ADA, a wonderful language with lots of nice features that NOBODY USES. Perhaps abandon the backwards compatibility and design a new language with all of the features that modern languages should have. Surely that's less effort, and time better spent, that trying to maintain backwards compat. with perl 5. I mean, what can't you do with perl 5 now? Will perl 6 attract a single non perl user that perl 5 wouldn't have attracted? I'm sure perl 6 will be a great language, and a great monument to something, rather like
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
development.lombardi.com
"new regex syntax" !!? So they want to use regex to attract more programmers?
:)
Would somebody tell me where I can find an application server written in perl? Or IDE? I'm wondering what's the perl good for? CGI!??
The reason that perl is successful is because it's useful. Only time will tell if people think perl6 is useful. If they do, they'll use it; if not, they'll stick to perl5.
Ob regex troll: I think the new regex handling kicks major ass. The new regexes have been promoted to true first-class variables, cleaning up a lot of messy syntactical issues. In addition, everyone who says it's not backwards compatible, well you're right. That's because the current regex libraries SUCK in comparison to the features offered by perl6. That's right, they SUCK, and it would be impossible to be backwards compatible with all the new (useful) features that have been added. If you don't believe the new syntax useful, try backtracking a 100,000 character repetitive string only to discover that the 15th matched number is too large or too small. Now think <{ ... }>.
This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
I agree with this post!
"Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental." -Slashdot
I've read every Apocalypse, Exegesis and, err, "Synopsis" (why the namechange?) so far. Almost everything I've read so far has seemed like a good idea. I've personally run into quite a few of the exact issues they're attempting to solve with these changes. Regexps are just as problematic as the rest of it, and I agree with the changes. And since they're ensuring reverse compatibility with every aspect (usually via a flag), even if I didn't like a particular aspect, I wouldn't have to use it.
Frankly, I'm looking forward to it. Parrot is nice, and if it weren't for the memory management issues from string-scalar registers, I'd be seriously looking into implementing it in hardware, but its still not too impressive without the Perl6 parser. So I'm waiting patiently, but I feel it'll be well worth it.
The changes may seem like a lot, but far more will actually be staying the same. Perl's already by far the easiest language for me to implement things in (and I've given basically everything a good try), and it seems as if this batch of changes will solve the few remaining rough areas. Except the learning curve - I think BASIC (for initial concepts) and Pike (for C syntax and functional structure) still have it beaten in that area. Still, it's kinda funny how many apparent perl-haters (old perl and new perl) there are, posting to a forum thats, err, written in Perl =)
Paranoid
Bwaahahahahaa.
Lisp hasn't enough portable GUI libraries???
Lisp has: CLIM (great), Gtk (usual crap), CLUE/CLIO, Garnet (great), CLM (Motif...), CommonWindows, etc,etc,etc - in fact, lisp is a playground for new GUI technologies...
Wow... you totally blew your credibility with that one! ;D
[ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]
When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.
Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.
FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.
It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.
So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.
Discussion
I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.
From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.
There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.
Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.
Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?
Shouts
To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.
To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers that they sideline you. The tireless work that you perform keeping the system clean and building is what provides the platform for the obsessives and the prima donnas to have their moments in the sun. In the end, we need you all; in order to go forwards we must first avoid going backwards.
To the paranoid conspiracy theorists - yes, I work for Apple too. No, my resignation wasn't on Steve's direct orders, or in any way related to work I'm doing, may do, may not do, or indeed what was in the tea I had at lunchtime today. It's about real problems that the project faces, real problems that the project has brought upon itself. You can't escape them by inventing excuses about outside influence, the problem stems from within.
To the politically obsessed - give it a break, if you can. No, the project isn't a lemonade stand anymore, but it's not a world-spanning corporate juggernaut either and some of the more grandiose visions going around are in need of a solid dose of reality. Keep it simple, stupid.
To the grandstanders, the prima donnas, and anyone that thinks that they can hold the project to ransom for their own agenda - give it a break, if you can. When the current core were elected, we took a conscious stand against vigorous sanctions, and some of you have exploited that. A new core is going to have to decide whether to repeat this mistake or get tough. I hope they learn from our errors.
Future
I started work on FreeBSD because it was fun. If I'm going to continue, it has to be fun again. There are things I still feel obligated to do, and with any luck I'll find the time to meet those obligations.
However I don't feel an obligation to get involved in the political mess the project is in right now. I tried, I burnt out. I don't feel that my efforts were worthwhile. So I won't be standing for election, I won't be shouting from the sidelines, and I probably won't vote in the next round of ballots.
You could say I'm packing up my toys. I'm not going home just yet, but I'm not going to play unless you can work out how to make the project somewhere fun to be again.
= Mike
--
- Trolling
and what about ruby