Front page | perl.perl6.meta |
Postings from May 2001
"David Grove" <pete@camel.petes-place.com> writes: > > Perl 5 is far from stagnant--please don't bend the truth to fit your > > points. My impression is that there's quite a bit more constructive > > activity on p5p than there was a year ago. > > I've stopped paying attention to P5P except for keeping an eye on the > possibility of a new surprise upgrade from Microsoft. However, the attitude > of the P5P is irrlevant to the user base. > > > : Unless Perl 6 is capable of parsing and running that 99.9% (or > > higher) of > > : Perl 5 scripts originally foretold, I foresee a far worse > > outcome for Perl 6 > > : than has happened for an almost universally rejected 5.6 and 5.6.1. > > > > There you go again, as Uncle Ronnie used to say. Excessive hyperbole > > will cost you sympathetic readership. > > Shall I list them again? Dude, it's been 13 months since 5.6 was released, > and two commercial entities have so far accepted it: ActiveState and SuSE. > Speaking with SuSE around October (7.0), the rep's answer getting back to me > was simply "we don't consider it to be stable enough yet to include it in > our distribution". Well, it's there in Mandrake 8, and was available as an update long before Mandrake 8 got released. Still only 5.6.0 though. Dunno about the rest, but it's 50% more than your claim... And remind me how long ago it was that most of the systems you're talking about actually started to include Perl as anything other than a 'Danger Will Robinson, unsupported contrib code' type package? -- Piers Cawley www.iterative-software.comThread Previous | Thread Next