Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Perl 6: Apocalypse 6 Released

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the dodging-a-pack-of-camels dept.

data64 writes "The latest Apocalypse talks about subroutines. Looks like we finally get type signatures which are way more powerful than the rudimentary prototypes available with Perl5."

3 of 247 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Don't forget Parrot by taliver · · Score: 1, Redundant

    However, you'll always be sacrificing speed for readability. Even if you think it's 'good enough', you should still hope that noone wants that extra order of magnitude in performance you can get with a truly compiled language.

    Just look at what happens everytime someone goes about writing an OS in Java. Someone invariably points out that the same thing would run 300% faster if C had been used instead.

    And, I'm sorry to say, there will always be a need for performance.

    Always.

    --

    I demand a million helicopters and a DOLLAR!

  2. Perl obit? by pongo000 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Looks like we finally get type signatures which are way more powerful than the rudimentary prototypes available with Perl5.

    If I want function signatures, I'll reach for the C compiler. Otherwise, I don't want to be encumbered with having to keep track of data types. That's the (former) beauty of Perl: Powerful yet simple.

    I think Perl 6 will be the end of the Perl dynasty as we know it. What a shame.

  3. The perl compiler can't grok that, either by Shade,+The · · Score: 1, Redundant

    A quick check reveals that doesn't compile as perl. And, frankly, it doesn't look like proper perl anyway. It's really irritating when people pick up obfusicated code and use that as an example from a language. Sure, you can write perl programs that are impossible to read, but you can do that with any language.

    It's not the language, it's the programmer. A good coder will make beautiful code in whatever language s/he uses. Remember, There's More Than One Way To Do It.