Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2020
On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 2:38 PM Paul "LeoNerd" Evans <leonerd@leonerd.org.uk> wrote: > On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 13:03:37 -0400 > Chris Prather <chris@prather.org> wrote: > > > If the Perl community has taught me anything it's consensus building > > takes *way* longer than 3-5 years. Moose is now 14 years old and > > based on the conversations around Cor there is still not a full > > consensus about the need for a core object system beyond bless(), and > > we're just barely (say the last 3-5 years) into a majority consensus > > that Moose is probably a reasonably good idea as long as you remove > > about 50% of it, without a real agreement on which 50% should be > > removed. > > I'm not sure that's really true these days. I think most of the core > folks are relatively clear on the fact that several things are missing: > > * try/catch > * proper exceptions to go along with theabove > * an object and class system > * a better thing than given/when/smartmatch > > Up until now there has been much talk and very little real activity. > People sometimes come along and suggest an idea or so, but very few > concrete implementations of real code ever turn up. I know because > until quite recently I have been very guilty of this - I'll suggest > "Hey, it would be great if ..." and nobody objects, but then nothing > ever happens. You can't just suggest a feature and expect that "someone > else" will implement it. > Kinda exactly my point. We have been working on try/catch for at least 11 years, and your specific implementation is 4 years old, with at least one more year of development to get it into core. By any reasonable measure we're either right against the 5 year window, or well past double it, before agreeing that a specific proposal should be in core. Can we reasonably say that in 5 years we'll have a consensus on how to replace it should it turn out to be a bad idea? And that's a well defined problem that was fairly well understood (at least by the core developers) before Try::Tiny dropped into the scene. To paraphrase Dan Book from irc.perl.org/#cor the other day: "[Features] are like Unicode. Everything thinks it means some obvious thing, but it's difficult to get to the point where they'll explain which of 20 things they mean if they even know" Without a concrete proposal then consensus is effectively meaningless. And you're exactly right that we've had a lack of concrete examples. Like you, I myself am as much to blame as anyone. Unlike you I haven't usefully contributed to the core yet, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. -ChrisThread Previous | Thread Next