use Perl

• Not to sound negative, but... (Score:1)

  by mshiltonj (1055) on 2002.04.24 2:58 (#7438) Journal

  Why is this new language being called Perl at all? Exactly what is the relationship between Perl 5 and Perl 6, other than their creator?
  
  I haven't read all the docs by Wall and Conway, but from what I have read, none of it looks like the perl I know and love.
  
  Why not give a wholly new name and make a clean break?

  Reply to This

  • Re:Not to sound negative, but... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by pdcawley (485) on 2002.04.24 3:26 (#7440) Homepage Journal

    Having done a chunk of non trivial perl 6 coding (A Scheme Interpreter), I can tell you that it 'feels' like Perl. My general feeling was along the lines of "Why can't I do this in Perl now", and not just for the // operator. given/when, the new subroutine prototyping rules, lexically scoped subs and all the rest just felt right.

    Reply to This

    Parent
  • Re:Not to sound negative, but... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 2shortplanks (968)

    Hmmm. I've had this argument several times.

    I've argued that this language is still Perl in the sense that the code (as Piers says above) still feels a lot like Perl. Remember that the stuff always being talked about are the differences not what has stayed the same.

    I've argued (recently, with limited success) that Perl 6 is Perl because Perl is the community and the devlopers, not any one bit of software or code.

    However, I've also argued quite a lot that maybe it should have a different name (if just
  • Re:Not to sound negative, but... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Damian (784)

    
    from what I have read, none of it looks like the
    perl I know and love.
    

    The Apocalypses and Exegeses can easily give that impression. But so can reading perldelta for any particular release of Perl 5. And the reason is the same: those documents are all about what is changing, and rarely mention what is staying the same (because then they'd be 10 times longer!)
    
    But Perl 6 really is Perl. It feels like Perl to program in, and most of its syntax and semantics are identical to those of Perl 5.
    
    It's like the
    • Re:Not to sound negative, but... (Score:1)

      by mshiltonj (1055)

      If you're interested in seeing just how similar Perl 6 is going to be to Perl 5 in most cases, check out ...And Now For Something Completely Similar [samag.com]
      
      Good article. It eliminated my trepidation about perl6. Now that I have a new eye to the changes, I'll have to read the Apocalyse and Exegesis docs in earnest.
      
      Thanks!
    • Re:Not to sound negative, but... (Score:1)

      by Odud (1047)

      I found "...And Now" a very reassuring document - If the examples are typical of the amount of conversion necessary then we have little to fear. I hope that Damian will be able to update the document or produce additional ones when the regex details are finalised.