use Perl

• CPAN (Score:1)

  by mugwumpjism (1871)

  They're all writing their extensions as CPAN modules.
  • Re: (Score:1)

    by chromatic (983)

    That's because they have no choice.
    • Re:CPAN (Score:1)

      by educated_foo (3106) on 2009.05.28 23:00 (#68824) Journal

      Exactly the opposite -- thanks to backwards compatibility, they *do* have a choice, and that's a big part of why they bother to contribute.

      Reply to This

      Parent

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by chromatic (983)

        If Perl 5 had a better class declaration and management system in the core, there'd be no need for Mouse, Moose, Squirrel, and dozens of other modules in the Class:: namespace.

        That has nothing to do with backwards compatibility (at least in a positive way).
        • Re: (Score:1)

          by educated_foo (3106)

          I agree that the profusion of OO support modules is a real waste. While I'm satisfied with blessed hashes and a bit of code generation or autoloading, people who want something more would benefit from having only one (or two or three?) solutions. On the other hand, if some half-baked Java clone had been added to the language 5 years ago (more syntax for pseudohashes?), the OO people probably wouldn't have created Moose at all. A lousy object system seems worse than an incomplete one.

          Backwards compatibi
        • Re: (Score:1)

          by phaylon (6115)

          What does core here mean? perl itself, or the bundled modules? If bundled, then there'd still be the need for the modules itself. If in perl itself, then we'd be stuck with it for a while. The fact that the common basics of Perl OO are very flexible is why we even got as far as having something as powerful as Moose. We're basically everything Scheme wanted to be. A small core (by which I mean the interpreter, not the distribution) with extensions living in libraries.

          --
          Ordinary morality is for ordinary people. -- Aleister Crowley