perl should be improved and perl6
 

perl provides good things and bad ones.

In the good thing, such as:
* it is adapted for text processing
* it is poorly typed
* it is enough powerful with unicode
* provide arrays and hash and reference (and objects)
* transparently manage any kind of numbers.
* is C interfacable
* has basic network and IPC possibilities
* pack/unpack


In the bad things, such as:
* bytes/unicode confusion
* stack overflow within bad regular expression
* memory consumption (might be an issue when energy will be more expensive?)
* insufficient typing
* some portability issue, notably with function «system».
* some $@% issues.
* pack limitation: cannot just modify one byte.



perl6 looks like a cleanup of perl, but I am wondering:

how will memory be handled in perl6?
how will bytes be handled in perl6?
why perl6 encourages complex regex (as x become standard)?
how will perl6 address portability issues?
how will perl6 address IPC issues?

Re: perl should be improved and perl6
 

>>>>> "j" == jm <jm@nospam.fr> writes:

j> perl provides good things and bad ones.
j> In the good thing, such as:
j> * it is adapted for text processing
j> * it is poorly typed

me thinks you don't understand typing well. perl actually has stronger
typing than many langs. it just types on the variable type (scalar vs
array vs hash) instead of the data type.

j> * it is enough powerful with unicode
j> * provide arrays and hash and reference (and objects)
j> * transparently manage any kind of numbers.
j> * is C interfacable
j> * has basic network and IPC possibilities

basic??? cpan has modules for almost every protocol out there and IPC
support is all done too. you don't know perl well if you say this is basic.

j> * pack/unpack

that is a major part of perl? it is used but not that often by most
coders.


j> In the bad things, such as:
j> * bytes/unicode confusion
j> * stack overflow within bad regular expression

huh?? then don't write bad regexes. most likely if it blows up in perl
it will do worse in other langs.

j> * memory consumption (might be an issue when energy will be more expensive?)
what?? you are smoking very strange stuff. ram is cheap and always
getting cheaper. cpu speed is the power hog.

j> * insufficient typing

again, you don't know what you are talking about.

j> * some portability issue, notably with function «system».

proof of the last comment. system is the way to call external
programs. how could that POSSIBLY BE PORTABLE if the external programs
vary from box to box?

j> * some $@% issues.

no, you have some issues.

j> * pack limitation: cannot just modify one byte.

huh??? pack doesn't modify anything. pack converts a list of values to a
single buffer string. and the C format can pack a single byte.


j> perl6 looks like a cleanup of perl, but I am wondering:

j> how will memory be handled in perl6?

just find with true gc.

j> how will bytes be handled in perl6?

with stone tablets.

j> why perl6 encourages complex regex (as x become standard)?

wtf are you babbling about? perl6 has grammars and rules which blow away
all current regex engines. you need to read up on them. in fact you can
use a bunch of it in perl5 now with cpan modules.

j> how will perl6 address portability issues?

what issues?

j> how will perl6 address IPC issues?

again, what issues? there are no IPC issues, other than your
delusions. perl has fine IPC.

uri

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com --
----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------
--------- Free Perl Training --- http://perlhunter.com/college.html ---------
--------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com ---------

Re: perl should be improved and perl6
 

jm schreef:

> perl [...] is poorly typed

By you? (Did you mean Perl by the way?)

--
Affijn, Ruud

"Gewoon is een tijger."

Re: perl should be improved and perl6
 

"V.Ronans" <v_r@spamless.and.happy> wrote:
> Dr.Ruud wrote:
> > jm schreef:
> >
> >> perl [...] is poorly typed
> >
> > By you? (Did you mean Perl by the way?)
>
> Honestly, you know full well he was talking about the programming
> language that pertains to this here news group, so feign ignorance? I
> mean why is this even such an issue? Other places where people talk
> about programming languages don't seem to care if it's all caps, first
> only capitalized, or all lowercase, or what have you. I've seen Java,
> java, and JAVA, cpp, C++, c++, c, C, python, PYTHON, cobol, Cobol,
> COBOL, and the list goes on.
>
> So why make such a stink about something so damn trivial?

Programming requires attention to detail. Well, good programming does,
anyway.

Xho

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked
advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate
this fact.

Re: perl should be improved and perl6
 

>>>>> "VR" == V Ronans <v_r@spamless.and.happy> writes:

VR> xhoster@gmail.com wrote:
>> "V.Ronans" <v_r@spamless.and.happy> wrote:
>>> Dr.Ruud wrote:
>>>> jm schreef:
>>>>
>>>>> perl [...] is poorly typed
>>>>
>>>> By you? (Did you mean Perl by the way?)
>>>
>>> Honestly, you know full well he was talking about the programming
>>> language that pertains to this here news group, so feign ignorance? I
>>> mean why is this even such an issue? Other places where people talk
>>> about programming languages don't seem to care if it's all caps,
>>> first only capitalized, or all lowercase, or what have you. I've
>>> seen Java, java, and JAVA, cpp, C++, c++, c, C, python, PYTHON,
>>> cobol, Cobol, COBOL, and the list goes on.
>>>
>>> So why make such a stink about something so damn trivial?
>>
>> Programming requires attention to detail. Well, good programming
>> does, anyway.

VR> Yes, when _programming_, not with geenral petty conversations, such
VR> responses as "it's Perl not perl or PERL" serve NO PURPOSE. Arguably
VR> neither does this leg of the thread, but that because people like you
VR> refuse to pull out your heads for some fresh air.

oh please remove your own cranium from your rectum first. you don't seem
to be a regular here and misspelling perl is a common thing among
posters who also don't post according to this group's guidelines. it is
even covered in an FAQ why perl is not an acronym. yes, colloquially
perl and other langs can be in whatever case but seeing it wrong when it
can be corrected is not the crime you make it out to be. so get yourself
off this flame war now and shut up about it until you are someone who
regularly answers questions here. the rule is no bitching about how
others help here until you help regularly and well.

uri

--
Uri Guttman ------ uri@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com --
----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------
--------- Free Perl Training --- http://perlhunter.com/college.html ---------
--------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com ---------

Re: perl should be improved and perl6
 

"V.Ronans" <v_r@spamless.and.happy> wrote:

> Dr.Ruud wrote:
>> jm schreef:
>>
>>> perl [...] is poorly typed
>>
>> By you? (Did you mean Perl by the way?)
>
> Honestly, you know full well he was talking about the programming
> language that pertains to this here news group, so feign ignorance? I
> mean why is this even such an issue? Other places where people talk
> about programming languages don't seem to care if it's all caps,

There are already plenty of people who think PERL is an acronym (it's
not), so "we" like to avoid PERL.

Moreover, Perl is the programming language, and perl is the executable,
hence there is a good reason to be case sensitive. Hence, perl [...] is
poorly typed seems to refer to the executable, hence Dr. Ruud's question.

--
John

http://johnbokma.com/perl/

Re: perl should be improved and perl6
 

"V.Ronans" <v_r@spamless.and.happy> wrote:


> Yes, when _programming_, not with geenral petty conversations, such
> responses as "it's Perl not perl or PERL" serve NO PURPOSE.

Yes they do:

A perl programmer is not the same as a Perl programmer.
A perl hacker is not the same as a Perl hacker.

And as I already wrote, PERL misleads people, they see PERL, and they
think it's an acronym.

I also use it as a quick way to see if someone knows what he/she is
talking about. Someone who claims to be a PERL programmer tells me that I
probably never want to maintain his/her code.

--
John

http://johnbokma.com/perl/

Re: perl should be improved and perl6
 

John Bokma wrote:
> "V.Ronans" <v_r@spamless.and.happy> wrote:
>
>> Dr.Ruud wrote:
>>> jm schreef:
>>>
>>>> perl [...] is poorly typed
>>>
>>> By you? (Did you mean Perl by the way?)
>>
>> Honestly, you know full well he was talking about the programming
>> language that pertains to this here news group, so feign ignorance? I
>> mean why is this even such an issue? Other places where people talk
>> about programming languages don't seem to care if it's all caps,
>
> There are already plenty of people who think PERL is an acronym (it's
> not), so "we" like to avoid PERL.
>
> Moreover, Perl is the programming language, and perl is the
> executable, hence there is a good reason to be case sensitive. Hence,
> perl [...] is poorly typed seems to refer to the executable, hence
> Dr. Ruud's question.

As someone else pointed out, in many other groups centered around a
particular programming language, no one pays this kind of attention of
people like your self seem to. Second, why is it people like yourself
can never give a straight answer as to why it is of such high
importance? If someone is a good programmer with the Perl language, does
it really make a difference how they spell it as long as they know what
they are doing? I mean you have people like Abigail who use their own
quote characters, Uri who can't use a bloody shift key, etc, and you're
worried about how some random bloke cases the word/term Perl?

--
G.Etly

Re: perl should be improved and perl6
 

John Bokma wrote:
> "V.Ronans" <v_r@spamless.and.happy> wrote:
>
>
>> Yes, when _programming_, not with geenral petty conversations, such
>> responses as "it's Perl not perl or PERL" serve NO PURPOSE.
>
> Yes they do:
>
> A perl programmer is not the same as a Perl programmer.
> A perl hacker is not the same as a Perl hacker.

There is no real difference. Only someone who wants to be so incredibly
close minded might give a flying hoot.

You could say a normal person's mind might implicitly do a lc(..) on
those two lines and they end up eq'ing.

> And as I already wrote, PERL misleads people, they see PERL, and they
> think it's an acronym.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=PERL

The spelling "Perl" is preferred over the older "PERL" (even though
some explain the language's name as originating in the acronym for
"Practical Extraction and Report Language"). The program that
interprets/compiles Perl code is called "perl", typically
"/usr/local/bin/perl" or "/usr/bin/perl".

> I also use it as a quick way to see if someone knows what he/she is
> talking about. Someone who claims to be a PERL programmer tells me
> that I probably never want to maintain his/her code.

That's a very poor measuring stick. Seems also hypocritical, considering
some of the more well known people in this group are known for doing
thing differently (Abigail for her interesting alternate forms of
quoting in replies, Uri for his inability to use the shift key, and so
forth), to judge some random bloke who may also choose to be different.

--
G.Etly

Re: perl should be improved and perl6
 

"V.Ronans" <v_r@spamless.and.happy> wrote:

> Actually it is also an acronym:

From Wikipedia:
"The name is occasionally given as "PERL" (for Practical Extraction and
Report Language). Although the expansion has prevailed in many of today's
manuals, including the official Perl man page, it is merely a *backronym*.
The name does not officially stand for anything, so spelling it in all
caps is incorrect."


Robotic Operational Neohuman Assembled for Nocturnal Sabotage

--
John

http://johnbokma.com/perl/