Slashdot Mirror


Call For Grant Proposals In Perl Development

On Elpeleg writes "The Perl Foundation is giving out grants for Perl development ranging from $500 to $3,000 in February 2009. You neither need to have a large, complex, or lengthy project nor be a Perl master or guru. You are encouraged to submit a proposal if you have a good idea and the means and ability to accomplish your Perl project. The deadline for proposal submissions is January 31, 2009."

137 comments

  1. Rules and Regulations by schmidt349 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Your proposal must be submitted in the form of a self-aware regular expression with at least 200 backreferences.

    1. Re:Rules and Regulations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound like a Python programmer.

    2. Re:Rules and Regulations by GigaplexNZ · · Score: 1

      Insightful? On something that claims printf doesn't exist in C? You don't have to be a programmer to recognise the Hello World example.

    3. Re:Rules and Regulations by RichardJenkins · · Score: 1

      This is an awesome idea, can I implement the project in Python ;)

    4. Re:Rules and Regulations by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

      C doesn't have any "built in functions", that I'm aware of. It's got a standard library, yeah, but no "built ins". It's a pedantic issue of semantics, but it's technically true.

      --
      -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
  2. Re:That isn't enough $$$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    I make over 120K a year programming in Perl.

  3. Wishlist by coryking · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1) Better tools... improve EPIC. Perl lacks a good IDE.
    2) Get perl running on IIS using ISAPI (basically, mod_perl for IIS).
    3) Either finish Perl6 or give up. Nobody cares about the CLR thing, give us Perl6 the language. The delay in shipping Perl6 is killing the language.
    4) ????
    5) Create a branch in CPAN called Ponies::*. There are many libraries for ponies such as Ponies::Little or Ponies::Fast.

    1. Re:Wishlist by dark12222000 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      1. It's perl. You really don't need any IDE.
      2. If you're trying to use perl on IIS, you shouldn't be using perl.
      3. Well, alright, I'll agree there.
      4. !!!!
      5. I'd like to place a vote for ...well crap, I can't actually think of anything CPAN lacks.

    2. Re:Wishlist by ImustDIE · · Score: 4, Informative

      1) Better tools... improve EPIC. Perl lacks a good IDE.

      Activestate's Komodo is a pretty decent IDE.

    3. Re:Wishlist by bcrowell · · Score: 4, Informative

      The delay in shipping Perl6 is killing the language.

      Perl is dead, Netcraft confirms it.

      But seriously, why does it make perl any less viable a language if a production-quality perl 6 takes a long time? Perl 5 continues to be lovingly maintained. Perl 6 will be able to run perl 5 modules in compatibility mode. Perl 6 is already out, and if you want to use it, you can; it's just not yet up to the same very high standards of quality and performance as perl 5.

    4. Re:Wishlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5) Create a branch in CPAN called Ponies::*. There are many libraries for ponies such as Ponies::Little or Ponies::Fast.

      Shouldn't those be inside the Object Management Group libraries?

    5. Re:Wishlist by SputnikPanic · · Score: 1

      Now hang on just a second. You've got a 4-digit ID. Aren't you supposed to be sitting atop some mountain, impervious to cold and clime, telling all those dedicated enough to seek your wisdom how the meaning of all human existence can be expressed in one beautifully simple line of perl?

    6. Re:Wishlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll probably get the "get off my lawn" response with this one, but I seriously don't get the dire need some "programmers" feel about having an IDE that matches the language their using. Just get to know emacs or vim and you'll never ask for an IDE again.

    7. Re:Wishlist by somenickname · · Score: 4, Funny

      1) Better tools... improve EPIC. Perl lacks a good IDE.

      Why would you need an IDE to write a single line of code?

    8. Re:Wishlist by outZider · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1) EPIC sucks, and so does Eclipse. Try ActiveState Komodo, but they half ass it anyway. Perl does need a good IDE.
      2) Download ActiveState perl, set PerlISAPI.dll as the handler for your pl or cgi files, done. It's free, too.
      3) Shut the hell up. Have you seen the amount of progress on Rakudo lately? Pugs, the reference implementation of Perl6, has been around for a while. The real thing, the real working thing, is in development and you can play with it and actually write scripts now.
      4) Eat crap.
      5) What.

      --
      - oZ
      // i am here.
    9. Re:Wishlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you need a 300mb Java-based IDE to code perl, you're doing it wrong.

      JAPH

    10. Re:Wishlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me fix that for you -

      "The delay in shipping Perl6 is killing the language."

      The delay in shipping Perl 6 KILLED the language.....

    11. Re:Wishlist by stop+bothering+me · · Score: 2, Informative

      1) Better tools... improve EPIC. Perl lacks a good IDE

      Have you seen Padre?. A Perl IDE written in Perl.

    12. Re:Wishlist by asackett · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My Perl IDE is called XEmacs. Perhaps you've heard of it?

      --

      Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.

    13. Re:Wishlist by palegray.net · · Score: 1

      Eh, I like Komodo all right, but I wind up writing the majority of my code in plain old gedit. Actually, almost any editor with syntax highlighting is "good enough" for me. Several of my active projects number in the many thousands of lines of code, too.

    14. Re:Wishlist by NickFortune · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It boggles the mind that I have to go through this nonsense to store an array in an array. Guess what I have to do in order to store an array in an array in ruby...

      Would it be something like this?

      ruby -e '

      foo=Array.new
      foo[1]=Array.new
      foo[1][2] = 3 '

      or rather, guess what I don't have to do in order to store an array in an array in ruby

      Something like this?

      perl -e '$foo[1][2] = 3'

      Perhaps it would help if you said which nonsense, specifically, struck you as being onerous?

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    15. Re:Wishlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1)http://it.slashdot.org/it/05/12/15/2112237.shtml?tid=145&tid=8 :(
      2)Active State has had this for ages ... did they stop shipping it? https://www.activestate.com/Products/activeperl/system_requirements.plex "Perl for ISAPI: ISAPI compatible Web server such as IIS 4.0+ or PWS 4.0+"
      3)Just drop the whole thing.
      4)$$$
      5)Factory::Glue::Process(\@Ponies);

    16. Re:Wishlist by RichardJenkins · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, I've heard of it. Try using vi. To edit python files.

      He he.

    17. Re:Wishlist by bytesex · · Score: 1

      A standard cross-platform GUI library; perl is eminently suited for GUI work but we still have to make do with an interface to GTK. I know this isn't the nineties anymore, but GUI work still has a place.

      Dead on with the perl6 thing. Continue with it, but call it something else. And produce perl6 with new and improved classes and runtime-context-free grammars and regexes without a VM.

      --
      Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
    18. Re:Wishlist by Myrddin+Wyllt · · Score: 1

      My Perl IDE is called XEmacs. Perhaps you've heard of it?

      I agree that emacs is still the sensible choice; either that or setting the universal constants, which I understand works well for some people.

      --
      [ ]Half Empty [ ]Half Full [x]Twice as big as it needs to be
    19. Re:Wishlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perl 6 will be able to run perl 5 modules in compatibility mode.

      I won't hold my breath for that.

      First, write a specification for the perl 5 language.

      The idea of being able to reproduce by error-and-trial all that scary mess of special cases is absurd.

    20. Re:Wishlist by berend+botje · · Score: 1

      Perl lacks one thing only: a compiler.

      Having to install a metric boatload of modules and runtime on the clients system everytime you deploy an application gets old fast.

    21. Re:Wishlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't call them "baffling". They're pretty simple in concept. The problem I have is in referencing and dereferencing them or testing for their existence or not (e.g., iterating through a list of them and finding the end of the list), which is crazy and quirky when they are nested several data structures deep. The operator precedence is all screwed up, or something, and the only way I've been able to reliably do it is by dumping them into temporary variables and dereferencing in stages. There's something I'm not getting, even though I've written a >10k line set of program modules in perl that use references extensively.

      I've changed my mind. References are conceptually simple, but you're right, they are baffling when it comes to using them practically.

    22. Re:Wishlist by x78 · · Score: 1

      Heard of vi? lighttpd?

      --
      Don't panic
    23. Re:Wishlist by adamkennedy · · Score: 1

      > 1) Better tools... improve EPIC. Perl lacks a good IDE.

      Padre is improving in leaps and bounds so that problem should hopefully be gone soon.

    24. Re:Wishlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      try

      ruby -e 'foo = [[3]]'

    25. Re:Wishlist by draven · · Score: 1

      What's so cool about a 4 digit id?

      --
      -- Marcus Ramberg
    26. Re:Wishlist by shvytejimas · · Score: 1

      5) Create a branch in CPAN called Ponies::*. There are many libraries for ponies such as Ponies::Little or Ponies::Fast

      and Ponies::OMG

    27. Re:Wishlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can stay on my lawn... it's ok.

    28. Re:Wishlist by eneville · · Score: 1

      thats because its designed to be interpreted.

      perlcc does produce binary output though

    29. Re:Wishlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you know nothing about Perl, right?

      Your answers to 1) and 2) are ridiculous. One of the core assumptions of Perl is that the user (read: developer) knows best what (s)he wants to do, so the language isn't trying to railroad him/her in any particular way. There is no single "right way" to do things; so if somebody wants to use (or write) an IDE for Perl, that's fine, and if somebody wants to use Perl on IIS, that's fine, too.

      Perl 6 is there for you to play with in the form of Pugs. I know that's not what you mean, of course; what you mean is Rakudo, which is also coming along nicely.

    30. Re:Wishlist by pne · · Score: 1

      Then try

      perl -e '$foo = [[3]]'

      Pretty much the same thing.

      ['arrays', ['inside', 'other'], 'arrays', ['are', 'possible', ['in', 'Perl'], 'too']];

      --
      Esli epei etot cumprenan, shris soa Sfaha.
    31. Re:Wishlist by Crayon+Kid · · Score: 1

      Yeah. That's what ed is for.

      --
      i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
    32. Re:Wishlist by coryking · · Score: 1

      emacs and vim aren't the same. Syntax coloring and auto-indentation are only 10% of what makes an IDE useful.

    33. Re:Wishlist by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      First, write a specification for the perl 5 language.

      Simple: A program is well-formed Perl 5, if the Perl v5.10.0 interpreter doesn't give you any error for it. The semantics of a Perl 5 program is defined by the behaviour exhibited when run on the Perl v5.10.0 interpreter. :-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    34. Re:Wishlist by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      4 is the smallest composite number.

      BTW, are you a numeric co-processor? :-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    35. Re:Wishlist by berend+botje · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing you haven't actually tried perlcc?

      Even on a trivial program it generates several gigabytes of intermediate files. I have tried to compile a normal project once, and when it wasn't done yet after about four days I've stopped this madness.

    36. Re:Wishlist by Vadim+Grinshpun · · Score: 1

      no, that's only for three-digiters and better.

    37. Re:Wishlist by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      No, you'll see, Duke Nukem Forever will be written in Perl 6, at least the Hurd version.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    38. Re:Wishlist by console0 · · Score: 1

      How about adding tests to CPAN that let you know when updates to your modules break other modules that use it. Probably not easy to do, but it is something that would be great to know.

    39. Re:Wishlist by helicologic · · Score: 1

      "it's just not yet up to the same very high standards of quality and performance as perl 5. "
      I think the moderators missed the humor in your post.

    40. Re:Wishlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By useful, do you mean pegging CPU utilization at 100% and consuming 4 GB of RAM? Locking up for minutes at a time while they do God knows what? Having ridiculously baroque designs so that it takes forever to try to integrate a new build tool into your workflow? That sort of thing?

      Before you tell me to get off your lawn, I'll say that I am all for nice IDEs. I don't like the fact that I am still using Vim and Emacs for most of my coding. I just don't see much good in Eclipse, Netbeans, or VS besides a few small niceties that should not require milions of lines of code to implement. They look like monstrous frameworks designed by people with far more time and money on their hands than good sense.

    41. Re:Wishlist by cervo · · Score: 1

      Perl has "shortcomings" depending on taste (for some people it may be perfect and that is fine). Personally I hate Perl's object system. Some of the other languages fix some of the Perl "shortcomings". In particular I like Python's object system. Still I find a lot of things in Python that I preferred in Perl (like the regular expressions, and also I'll take braces over white space or even ruby's end). However for me even with all its flaws (for me) I now prefer Python over Perl.

      Perl6 has potential. The new object system seems much better than Perl 5 (to me). If Perl 6 was out I think it would be harder to choose between Python and Perl and there is a good chance I would choose Perl. But as of now Perl 6 is sadly not ready for prime time. And Perl 5 is still Perl 5.

      It's not that Perl 5 is broken, it's that other languages are evolving to a new level (in many cases a new level of LISPness :)). Perl 6 is Perl's evolution but it is delayed. So for me, and a bunch of others, we are on the Python/Ruby/Lua/etc. until Perl 6 wagon.

    42. Re:Wishlist by chromatic · · Score: 1

      Some of the other languages fix some of the Perl "shortcomings". In particular I like Python's object system.

      Perl 5's object system came from Python. See Larry Wall's Programming is Hard, Let's Go Scripting:

      I'm not terribly qualified to talk about Python however. I don't really know much about Python. I only stole its object system for Perl 5.

    43. Re:Wishlist by doom · · Score: 1

      First, write a specification for the perl 5 language.

      Perl has a very throughly set of regression tests. That's better than a spec.

    44. Re:Wishlist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In that case that's one heck of a crappy implementation

    45. Re:Wishlist by doom · · Score: 1

      Personally I hate Perl's object system.

      Ha. You speak as if there were only one. (I wish). Multiple different ways of implementing Objects exist in the perl 5 world, and there are many, many new attempts at fixing perceived limitations of the earlier styles. You've got your choice of Moose, Object::InsideOut, Class::InsideOut, and so on.

      Whether this is a symptom of perl's glorious diversity or a lack of sane standardization, is of course open to question.

      It's not that Perl 5 is broken, it's that other languages are evolving to a new level (in many cases a new level of LISPness :)).

      Perl 5 is already pretty-lispy: Higher-Order Perl.

    46. Re:Wishlist by Vspirit · · Score: 1

      http://www.wxwidgets.org/
      http://wxperl.sourceforge.net/

      Is a likely solution.

      Is it that you did not know about this,
      or that you did know and found it wanting?

    47. Re:Wishlist by isorox · · Score: 1


      ruby -e 'foo = [[3]]'

      perl -e '$foo = [[3]]'

      See -- ruby is superior, equivalent code is 8% shorter!

    48. Re:Wishlist by Vspirit · · Score: 1

      Parrot SDL is also quite interesting in this context.

      http://www.wgz.org/chromatic/talks/parrot_sdl/index.html

  4. Re:That isn't enough $$$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I only make $86k (+misc stock), but then again, I'm not quite 2 years out of college.

  5. Proposal requirements by NewbieProgrammerMan · · Score: 4, Funny

    You neither need to have a large, complex, or lengthy project nor be a Perl master or guru.

    You do, however, have to be able to fit it all on one line.

    --
    [b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
    1. Re:Proposal requirements by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      So, there's more than one way to get the grant?

  6. Pointless motivating with small money by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 2, Insightful
    As parent says, nobody worthwhile is going to do these projects for the money. Even if you're earning only $20/hr (big money in some parts of the world), then $1k is just 50 hours - hardly worth doing for the money. For most higher paid programmers $1k is less than 20 hours.

    That means you're really going to be doing it for the honor. In that case forget the money and rather make a "hall of fame", something like: http://armlinux.simtec.co.uk/whoswho.html . That's worth more for a good consultant and costs almost nothing to give out as a prize.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Pointless motivating with small money by ChrisDolan · · Score: 1

      I received a Perl Foundation grant in 2007 -- $2000 for about 80 hours of work. That's not a very good rate for an experienced engineer in the USA, but for me the money was not just a carrot but also a stick. I knew that failing my project would be a very public humiliation. It was work I wanted to do anyway, but I had procrastinated it in my free time. The deadline and publicity made me finish it. So, IMO it's the acceptance of the grant that's a significant source of motivation, not the completion.

      If it wasn't for the money, I may have been just another open source programmer who didn't finish just another open source project.

  7. Converter! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't suppose a program to convert all my Perl programs over to a non-dead-end language is going to get any grant money? :)

    1. Re:Converter! by outZider · · Score: 1

      like?

      --
      - oZ
      // i am here.
    2. Re:Converter! by Tom9729 · · Score: 1

      Since when is Perl dead?

    3. Re:Converter! by mobby_6kl · · Score: 2, Funny

      Perl is not dead, Parrot is. Though I've heard it might in fact be just resting.

    4. Re:Converter! by eneville · · Score: 0, Redundant

      its just pining

    5. Re:Converter! by spartacus_prime · · Score: 0

      no, it's stunned.

      --
      If you can read this, it means that I bothered to log in.
  8. I'll get around to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All I need is an irritating little quirk in a shell and some time to smooth out a well-rounded glossy proposal.

  9. Re:That isn't enough $$$ by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Six figure salaries for a programmer is a sign of doom for the language. Nobody else is willing to do your job because the rest of the world has moved on. If only I could have my days as a $35/hr. VB 6.0 programmer back.

  10. House of glue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Perl is the best glue there is. It works on everything. Still, I would not build a house out of glue.

    1. Re:House of glue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Perl is the best glue there is. It works on everything. Still, I would not build a house out of glue.

      I thought we were still talking about ponies for a second...

    2. Re:House of glue by dwpro · · Score: 1

      And C is the best engine. It outperforms anything. I would not build a house out of engine.
      A language is not limited by its most compelling feature(s).

      --
      Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. -- Susan Ertz
  11. I thought it meant you lived in NY/California? by BerntB · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Some places DO seem to pay that kind of money. Or the GP lied. Or the really is good (the Perl world has some really smart and interesting people).

    The real problem for Perl is the bad hype, which your tro... hrm, guessing without facts, is a typical example of.

    --
    Karma: Excellent (My Karma? I wish...:-( )
    1. Re:I thought it meant you lived in NY/California? by sholsinger · · Score: 1

      I get paid $50/hr for VB.NET stuff. (Northeast PA) There ARE still quite a few of VB6 to .NET port projects around, so don't give up hope just yet. And in most cases, you won't need to change too much. VB8(.NET 2.0) has a lot of legacy backward compatibilities built into the language to allow for VB6-style coding practices. And .NET2.0+ are much nicer to work with than 1.1, as with most M$ releases, you want to wait until the second service pack or version.

      The .NET framework isn't difficult to understand or learn, and is well documented in most cases. Though the few cases that aren't are usually the most difficult and frustrating to troubleshoot. Especially without the source.

    2. Re:I thought it meant you lived in NY/California? by BerntB · · Score: 1

      Your comment ended up in the wrong place? I have never written a line of VB in my life and haven't programmed a Win computer for more than half a decade.

      --
      Karma: Excellent (My Karma? I wish...:-( )
  12. Re:That isn't enough $$$ by TheModelEskimo · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I don't get it. If you make like $129K or $121K, why don't you just say so, rather than this "over than" stuff? I don't think anybody's going to look at that and think, "hey, maybe he makes $900K! He did say *over*, after all!" That and you're posting as AC, which shouldn't make it a big deal... :D

  13. Re:That isn't enough $$$ by TheModelEskimo · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "over than." sigh. I hope this vista upgrade finishes soon so I can go to bed.

  14. Re:That isn't enough $$$ by somenickname · · Score: 1

    US$35/hr to code in VB? I'm going to have to assume the benefits were good. Something along the lines of, "Location: Strip Club". I can think of no other plausible reason to subject yourself to that pain for so little money.

  15. here's a better idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    someone should make a bullshit undocumented language with fucked up syntax and call it "Eels".

    then someone else can use it to make a bullshit framework for lazy fucks called Hovercraft.

    Guess how many lines it takes in Ruby?

    Does that include the lines to take the cock out of your mouth or not?

  16. Greatly exagerated demise by gpmanrpi · · Score: 1

    I think this hackneyed PERL is dead rhetoric is finally starting to annoy me. Is the current development direction moving away from PERL as a language for web development? Absolutely. I find myself using PERL for basic tasks I don't feel like writing code for in say C# or Java because it is annoying to do so and I can do it in a few lines in PERL. So the purpose of the language has changed dramatically and at the same time not at all, since that usage is pretty much at the heart of PERL's origins.
    I say then that projects funded should help ensure that this remains the case. So perhaps more database interfaces for DBI. Perhaps a quick search through CPAN for things that have not been updated in a year or so. It might be easy and worth say $3,000 dollars or so to do. Minimal work minor update stuff because Perl6 stuff has moved much of the development for Perl5 into maintenance mode.

    1. Re:Greatly exagerated demise by davegaramond · · Score: 1

      Stop writing Perl as PERL please, it hurts my eye.

    2. Re:Greatly exagerated demise by Chysn · · Score: 2, Funny

      > Stop writing Perl as PERL please, it hurts my eye.

      The cyclops has spoken!

      --
      --I'm so big, my sig has its own sig.
      -- See?
    3. Re:Greatly exagerated demise by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

      He's probably posting from his MAC.

    4. Re:Greatly exagerated demise by doom · · Score: 1

      I say then that projects funded should help ensure that this remains the case. So perhaps more database interfaces for DBI.

      What's supposed to be missing? There's around 300 hits on CPAN if you search for DBD.

    5. Re:Greatly exagerated demise by gpmanrpi · · Score: 1

      No I just always learned that Perl (if it makes you all feel better) stood for Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister...
      I was obviously wrong. Since it was chosen at random.

  17. Re:I propose... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in theory I agree. In practice, you should try uninstalling it.

  18. Worth $500? by MortenMW · · Score: 1, Funny

    #!/usr/local/bin/perl
    print "Hello, world!\n";

    How much will I get for this?

    1. Re:Worth $500? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Sorry, your program hard-coded the path of perl. That disqualified it. I'm going to get the $500 instead with the following masterpiece:

      #! /usr/bin/env perl
      print "Hello world!\n";

      SCNR

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  19. Re:I propose by bytesex · · Score: 1

    Funnily, that isn't even all too off-topic in a discussion on perl. But I'm not for it, anyway. I like my camels with a bit of hair.

    --
    Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
  20. Finish Perl 6 or give up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The delay in releasing Perl 6 ( shut up with the idiot mantra, "It'll be ready when it's ready" ) has done more to kill off the language than any other factor.

    New scripters have taken up Python or Ruby. Old timers have got frustrated at the philosophical debate about what it means to 'release' a language. Some of the people involved with the project appear to be having a bit of a laugh at the expense of the coders who have been using the language. No goals, no milestones. Some airy fairy notion that it will never be complete. The PR job alone has been a total disaster.

    It would have been better not to mention Perl 6 until it was ready - haven't you Perl people learnt the lesson about announcing the next product before it is ready for sale and while you still have the old product to shift?

    If a stable version of Perl 6 is not released in 2009 then Perl will be left dead in the water. That may already have been the case for some time.

    1. Re:Finish Perl 6 or give up by listening+to+triplej · · Score: 1

      Complaining about the long wait for Perl 6 is so 2003!

      In the mean time the core Perl developers have been busy designing and building the programming language (and runtime environment) of the future.

      2009 is the year to start getting excited about Perl 6 again!

      For anyone paying attention, things have been really starting to come together in the last year.
      - Parrot is nearing 1.0 production release (in March 2009)!
      - Perl 6 on Parrot (Rakudo) works and gets new features added every day (see recent note saying "now passing 765 more tests than two weeks ago")

      There is nothing dead about Perl 6 apart from public opinion (which will change).

      TPF grants just reinforce the commitment that is there to push ahead with the vision that is Perl.

      Most people may have abandoned Perl for more fashionable languages at the moment, but when there is a shiny new Perl 6, the crowds will return (and Ruby will be looking quite old-skool).

      I predict that the extra effort that has gone into designing Perl 6 will pay dividends 10 fold, with the language being a major player for the next 50 year (instead of 5).

      Go Perl 6 !!!

  21. Just finish Perl6 fer kreissakes by onlyjoking · · Score: 1

    With Perl6 taking almost a decade to complete it doesn't make sense to waste this small amount of money on anything other than getting Perl6 out the door?

    1. Re:Just finish Perl6 fer kreissakes by ChrisDolan · · Score: 3, Informative

      The primary reason for the longevity of the Perl 6 development effort is shortage of volunteers. To put it harshly, people like you spend their energy complaining instead of helping.

      The money is most certainly well-spent on both Perl 5 and Perl 6. I was a Perl Foundation grant recipient to work on Perl::Critic, a static analysis tool and code quality aid. My contributions are making a positive influence to help with the readability, maintainability and portability of large Perl 5 codebases. (read TFA and you'll see my name mentioned) Perl::Critic is being actively used in improving the Parrot codebase.

      What have you done to help?

    2. Re:Just finish Perl6 fer kreissakes by cervo · · Score: 1

      I'm going to say that another thing missing is direction from the top. The last time I poked around (admittedly 6 or so months ago) it didn't look like there was a clear path laid out to release. More developers won't fix that. Without someone at the top directing things you have chaos. Not only that, but volunteers will lose motivation after a time. Many are goal oriented and want to see that they are making progress towards a goal.

    3. Re:Just finish Perl6 fer kreissakes by chromatic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Many are goal oriented and want to see that they are making progress towards a goal.

      The Rakudo spectest chart has daily updates of exactly that.

    4. Re:Just finish Perl6 fer kreissakes by cervo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Passing tests is something, but does not in itself equate to completeness.

      Look at http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6/index.cgi?development_dashboard that seems to have some goals. But still "Language Definition" is on the todo list. And "Language Definition" seems a pretty big item to me, as changes in that can change the tests. Not only that, would you write a bunch of code in a language knowing that at any moment it could be invalidated by a few small tweaks? I wouldn't, not production code at least.

      They have some other things like the command line (deciding what it is, then implementing it), deciding what the installation package is, etc.. But still until the language design is frozen, you will never be done. And if a major change is made that results totally rebuilding the architecture you could end up throwing a lot of work away.

      This todo list seems more like a brainstorm. Really what is needed is someone like Larry Wall to finish his documentation, then someone to write tests based on the Perl 6 language design (In Perl 6) and then passing those tests can become a chart to Perl 6. Although there will still be issues such as installation package, converting modules in CPAN and getting it working with Perl6, etc... But the most important thing is to get the language down. Then people will start playing with it to get a jump on learning Perl 6. And once the language is finalized it can start to be used in some corporate settings as a piece of beta software.

      Most likely the real Perl 6 revolution won't come until CPAN (or some other entity like it) is made for Perl 6 and has some of the more useful modules (like DBI among others). Right now a large part of Perl's value is CPAN and the various modules available. That is another project that cannot even really fully start until after the language is finalized.

  22. Re:That isn't enough $$$ by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

    In that case, Steve Ballmer and his 7-figure salary should be worried!

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  23. Re:That isn't enough $$$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I make pretty good money doing Perl too but it seems right to give back too.

  24. The first thing that came to my mind.... by hellstorm · · Score: 1

    when I read this post was the Ministry of Silly Walks and their grants, I don't know why :-P

    --
    --------------------------------------------------
    Programming is good for health
  25. Real webservices toolkit by plurgid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What is killing perl (at least at my job) is it's lack of a proper, modern, standards compliant webservices toolkit.

    SOAP::Lite is a sorry mess. It's *simply amazing* that it works *at all*. I've tried to scratch that itch to fix it so many times, but the internals of SOAP::Lite are so *incredibly* convoluted, that it's damn near impossible.

    Perl needs a completely new SOAP toolkit, with real WSDL support for all the different document modes.

    That ONE thing will keep perl entrenched deep in the guts of the corporate world, in the end ... providing all of us perl hackers with job security for years to come.

    So ... I've got a pretty steady day job, and no time at night. I already make 6 figgures, and I have a reasonable expectation of employment beyond 1 year.

    Surely, there is one of us perlheads out there who is in a position to give a year up to really iron this out in perl. I'd donate even. Like I said, this would be the gift that keeps on giving to the perl community.

    1. Re:Real webservices toolkit by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 1

      SOAP::Lite IS a sorry mess..

      Definately what you say is true about how replacing it with something that actually works would be the gift that keeps giving to Perl.

      There are alot of crap perl modules on CPAN with the word SOAP in the title. What a pity, because they do so much damage. A typical perl coder used to glancing at CPAN to see if there is an module available tells his boss, "Yep we can do SOAP," confident in the general high quality of CPAN modules thus far encountered. Then after spending weeks trying to get something to work ( and learning SOAP itself ) he realizes that SOAP::Lite is crap, and so is everything else on CPAN with the word SOAP in the title. CPAN has been the source of almost invariably high quality modules for the whole career of that perl programmer, but now his project is late due to the time required to learn SOAP, and figure out that SOAP::Lite is crap, and the time spent looking for perl alternatives that don't exist, and the time spent trying to fix SOAP::Lite. This programmer doesn't have any free time left to reimplement SOAP::XXX because they are spending all their effort trying to keep their job.

      And later when the programmer has some time, they have figured out that SOAP is crap anyway and REST is the way to go for web services. And maybe languages like Perl or Java or Ruby or Python or C# aren't the way of the future for this sort of thing anyway.

      Maybe the future will be something more along the lines of Nomadic Pict, or Mozart/Oz or maybe some new experimental linear logic programming language seemingly a perfect fit for exchanging web resources over the internet.

      --
      ...
    2. Re:Real webservices toolkit by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      So, make something better.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    3. Re:Real webservices toolkit by plurgid · · Score: 1

      Indeed. If I had the time and resources.
      Unfortunately, time is something I don't have these days.

      Which is why I bothered posting this. I hope someone who does have the time will pick it up and run with it.

  26. Proposal by Stormy+Dragon · · Score: 1

    Calculate the probability that holding down the shift key and hitting random numbers will produce a valid PERL program.

  27. Re:That isn't enough $$$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I suck at making money. I'm a damn wizard at perl and have been doing it for almost 10 years and have never come close to what you are making.

  28. Open Source Porting by Toad-san · · Score: 1

    I'm asking my sources for pointers to the some nice government-paid-for-it-so-we-own-it-right? Space Shuttle source code. Or some nice ICBM or IRBM or ABM firmware, that would do. Cruise missile? Cell phone GPS? Whatever.

    Knock out a quick proposal for porting to perl (if it isn't written in perl already, that is), and off we go!

  29. explain.pl program.pl by nategoose · · Score: 1

    What's needed is a perl script that reads other perl scripts and explains them to other programmers.

  30. nonsense by coryking · · Score: 1

    1) Good IDE's like eclipse or Visual Studio make a programmer more productive. They have refactoring tools, they analyze your code and make it easy to track down where stuff is, they parse your comments to provide very useful tooltips that describe function parameters (intellesense). Without such tools, it takes significantly longer to learn how a new project fits together. Just being able to right click on a bit of code that calls a method and say "goto definition" is worth the price alone.
    2) Nonsense. PHP runs on IIS, why shouldn't perl. IIS has a lot of cool stuff going for it these days that apache doesn't.
    3) Good.
    4) #@$%
    5) Ponies my friend, ponies.

  31. It matters because it creates uncertianty. by coryking · · Score: 1

    If you were starting a new project would you base it on Perl5 when you aren't sure Perl6 is just around the corner? No offense to anybody, but Perl6 is a classic example of the second system syndrome and serves as an excellent reminder of why it is never a good idea to rewrite code. While they were busy rewriting code, PHP, Ruby and Python cleaned their lunch.

    Perl 6 is already out

    It isn't out until I read about its release on Arstechnica and Slashdot.

    1. Re:It matters because it creates uncertianty. by doom · · Score: 1

      If you were starting a new project would you base it on Perl5 when you aren't sure Perl6 is just around the corner?

      You would if you knew anything about perl. In fact you probably would if you knew anything about software -- betting the farm on something that's barely out the door isn't a very bright move.

      As for the second system effect, you're probably correct to some extent, but the solution to that isn't "ship perl 6", the solution is to point out that it's silly FUD -- the perl 5 project is going strong, the perl 5.10 release had quite a few interesting new features, and if anything perl 5 development has improved since the perl 6 project started (certainly CPAN activity is way up).

      So thank you for the opportunity to once again state the obvious: perl is not dead.

  32. Hmmm... by coryking · · Score: 1

    Having to install a metric boatload of modules and runtime on the clients system everytime you deploy an application gets old fast.

    I agree with you on this. I've yet to see a really good "best practices for perl deployment".

    That said, wait until you deploy a PHP application only to find that PHP wasn't compiled with some feature you were using. Good times.

    1. Re:Hmmm... by TheLink · · Score: 1

      I've used pp and it worked well enough for me. Of course if you have binary modules you need to build them on a platform that's compatible with the intended destination.

      http://search.cpan.org/~smueller/PAR-Packer-0.982/lib/pp.pm

      --
  33. Vi is not an IDE by coryking · · Score: 1

    Syntax Coloring and auto-indentation is a baseline that every text editor should support. IDE's parse your code and give you useful information about it. They parse your comments (xmldoc for C#) and use them for tooltips. They help you find function declarations. They help you refactor your code. They help manage your files. They integrate into your version control system. And so on.

    To go slightly off topic, I think intellesense was the best invention ever. It gives a programmer a very strong incentive to comment their functions and parameters because those comments show up right away in the IDE.

    1. Re:Vi is not an IDE by dwpro · · Score: 1

      Do you write perl projects in Visual studios? If so, please let me know your setup (visual perl, etc), if not, STFU.

      Perhaps not all (there may be plugins I'm not aware of) but most of what you mentioned exists in VI either inherent or through plugins (refactoring, file management, and version control integration, even intellisense). Granted, some of these aren't as feature rich implementations, but they are there. It also sports some features that VS does not have, like more advanced code folding, more language support, and some of the capacities from the command line are just fantastic. I use both on a regular basis.

      --
      Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. -- Susan Ertz
  34. Re:That isn't enough $$$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He(or she) should also point out what location this is in. If you are required to be in a specific geographic area, then that may carry a huge cost. If I can do my job from a beach in Belize, then that's a huge difference from having to live in Manhattan in terms of cost of living.

  35. Re:Just finish Perl 6 fer kreissakes by chromatic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not only that, would you write a bunch of code in a language knowing that at any moment it could be invalidated by a few small tweaks? I wouldn't, not production code at least.

    No one's suggesting you do so for Perl 6 right now. Ask again later this year.

    But still until the language design is frozen, you will never be done.

    Perl 5 is 14 years old, and its language design still isn't frozen. Almost every question of language design in the past year regarding Perl 6 has come from the implementors, whether people writing the language, people writing specification tests for the language, or writing applications in the language.

    Really what is needed is someone like Larry Wall to finish his documentation, then someone to write tests based on the Perl 6 language design (In Perl 6) and then passing those tests can become a chart to Perl 6.

    That's exactly what we're doing, just simultaneously.

    If you're not advocating a waterfall-style approach I apologize -- but I get that impression. I've never seen that process work for any software, especially a programming language. I'm sure you can ask just about any other implementor of Perl 6 and receive the same answer.

  36. Logic/Constraint Web Programming? by weston · · Score: 1

    Maybe the future will be something more along the lines of Nomadic Pict, or Mozart/Oz or maybe some new experimental linear logic programming language seemingly a perfect fit for exchanging web resources over the internet.

    I'm intruiged. In general about the potential of logic programming languages (I'd love to replace SQL with Prolog in a number of contexts), and specifically about your proposition, but I'm not sure I see how constraint/logic programming is the perfect fit for web services. Can you elaborate?

    1. Re:Logic/Constraint Web Programming? by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 1

      Lemme preface that I am not an expert at logic programming but it is what intrigues me at the moment. I'll try and explain why it intrigues me, and why I want to learn more. I'm not saying the following is true, but I will try to convey why I am curious about it.

      Web services are potentially distributed over many places. The coolest stuff I've seen with regards to distributed programming is with logic programming languages.

      Forget openness for a minute and read this: http://www.mozart-oz.org/documentation/dstutorial/node2.html#chapter.distmodel

      Isn't this how you want to program and understand your web services, opening up a public interface, and wrapping interfaces to other's open services via wrappers when needed using this paradigm?

      Logic programming handles dependencies well. I need a, b and c to do x maps to x :- a, b, c . A language like Mozart/OZ that lets you customize the search strategy and handles concurrency should allow you to deal with getting a, b and c from web services around the internet. Most of the time you aren't going to infinite loop, and especially in the areas where SQL is used, you aren't because your data is finite. And calling a REST web service that can be cached and has stateless connection semantics means you should be able to attempt to unify with it ( or its wrapper ) efficiently.

      Most software from desktop software to server software will probably just be databases of data forward chained to other things like what is displayed on the screen in a concurrent manner. All software is going to be database software. And prolog et al are better than the current language of choice SQL. And with all the dependencies in software, isn't it nice that :- means 'depends on'? Maybe life is just one big makefile... ;-P

      And though I don't pretend to understand linear logic, it is the logic of resources. So while you can use the fact that 1 = 3 - 2 as many times as you want in a proof, you can't spend the dollar you have in your pocket more than once to attain a goal. You can have a dollar and can use it to buy a pepsi and you can use it to buy a coke, but you can't use it to buy a pepsi and a coke. Doesn't this seem like it would map well to payment for web services? Or to novel search strategies? I dunno. Also if you read the Pi/Calculus/nomadic pict/join calculus (that last one is cool) pages somewhere it says that there is a correspondence between these and linear logic, though I forgot what it was supposed to be...

      Side note: I want to experiment also with implementing protocols such as HTTP with DCGs or something like it. I want to be able to hook into every possible place without replacing any code. I think logic programming can do everything aspect oriented programming can but better and more understandably. Maybe this is a bad idea but maybe not.

      --
      ...
  37. Static Tree Analysis for Refactoring? by hachete · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Anyone?

    --
    Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious
  38. Hmmm. by coryking · · Score: 1

    By useful, do you mean pegging CPU utilization at 100% and consuming 4 GB of RAM?

    You mean emacs? *cough*

  39. Re:That isn't enough $$$ by pileated · · Score: 1

    where!? any more jobs?

    just kidding. good for you. i'm sure you're not alone in making a good living from perl. it still works, headache-inducing syntax and all.

  40. Re:House of glue -- why not? by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

    Mix the right kind of glue with some gravel and sand, and you've got something you can build a house on.

  41. You've already got the help - CPAN by head_dunce · · Score: 1

    I write in Perl almost everyday. They should build in a lot of the CPAN modules so that they will be documented better (with another camel) and I won't have to dig on CPAN for things a lot of new languages come with out of the box. Yes, it's easy to install modules, but many are almost standards at this point and should be brought into the language.

  42. Re:That isn't enough $$$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    being tired had nothing to do with it. you're just fucking stupid.

  43. thanks for the link by listening+to+triplej · · Score: 1

    I was wondering if there was an up-to-date graph somewhere. P.S. despite the various ignorant comments, there are some people excited about Perl 6. Thanks for your hard work!