develooper Front page | perl.bootstrap | Postings from July 2000


Thread Next
Frank DiCostanzo
July 20, 2000 13:12
Message ID:


speaking as someone who would like to get involved in the project, perhaps
the implementors should consider that one of the reasons for this rewrite
is that the existing one is too complicated. much of the discussion so far
has concerned using 2-3 different languages with abstract
back/front/middles and metalanguages, etc. i don't specifically disagree
with most of these proposals, but perhaps you should consider examining a
simple clean implementation which looked ahead to the eventual goals of
the project.

things i would find important include 

simplicity of implementation (so that people can participate without
requiring an internship in the project)

consistant goals (for instance having both a compiling and interpreting
execution model which are intending to run side by side can degrade the
performance of both i.e. in the garbage collection)

independance of legacy code (if you want to be able to drop perl5 at some
point, don't write it in at this point in the project- it will be hard to
remove later)

i don't want to sound like i'm against spiffy ideas like metalanguages or
microperls or whatever, but i feel that those ideas need to be weighed in
on more then their technical merits.

---                                   Suum Cuique
sometimes being right is not enough

Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About