Front page | perl.perl6.internals |
Postings from August 2002
At 8:56 AM -0400 8/3/02, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>Sorry for the Wayback Machine...
>
>On Mon, 2002-07-15 at 01:13, Ashley Winters wrote:
>> I decided my next step should be to take a look at the PDDs so I know what's
>> going on. I would expect them to be like a writer's canon for a TV
>>show. I'll
>> write my impressions as I go on.
>>
>> PDD00:
>> Does PDD still mean 'Perl Design Document', or should it mean 'Parrot ...'?
>> The documents seem to all refer to the interpreter.
>>
>> While I'm thinking about it, where will 'Parrot' leave off and
>>'Perl6' begin?
>> At some point, it will be inappropriate to discuss the Parrot interpreter on
>> a Perl6 list, since Perl6 might have JVM/CLR backends, and Parrot might have
>> Python/Ruby frontends.
>
>These are both questions I asked a long time ago, for which I received
>no sufficient answers. So PDD 0, at least, remained as it was.
D'oh! I need to catch up with my mail.
Feel free to throw patches to the list about it, though.
> >From a coding/design perspective, there was at least a thread starting
>at http://archive.develooper.com/perl6-internals@perl.org/msg03748.html
>
>As a matter of fact, looking at it more closely indicates that this was
>actually annotated with CVS version 1.2 of PDD 0. Original threads:
>http://archive.develooper.com/perl6-internals@perl.org/msg08677.html
>http://archive.develooper.com/perl6-internals@perl.org/msg08678.html
>
>As you can see, I was dilemma'd about it, too. :-)
Oh, the irony! :)
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
dan@sidhe.org have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next