Bennett Todd wrote: > set the language out on a nice path, helping to ensure it doesn't > start off with difficulty being properly compatible with perl5. > > And perl5 is certainly a sufficiently expressive language to be a > find choice for this job; unless I've missed something this perl6 > project isn't here with it's primary goal a radical overhaul of the > language, but rather the implementation. > > So I'd turn the question around and say what's the incentive to > write perl6 in perl6 and not in perl5 --- and so, presumably, to be > actively pursuing language incompatibility with perl5 from the very > start, and using that incompatibility in the implementation of > perl6? Is the language perl5 really that deeply flawed? IMHO, yes it is. I know to most folks backward compatibility is essential, but IMHO the enslavement to it is what will cause Perl to lose out to other languages like Python. Not only do we have a language that "sucks" in some respects, but we're too bullheaded to fix what we can when we get the opportunity. -- John Porter Aus tiefem Traum bin ich erwacht.