From: "Michael T. Richter" Date: 2008-08-05T15:43:08+09:00 Subject: Re: State of the Onion --=-H6NNENhztlBMj4VjEyMb Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-azBGevq3qjVCdZz1Eguh" --=-azBGevq3qjVCdZz1Eguh Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 15:17 +0900, Martin DeMello wrote: > I don't understand this hostility to perl6, which (discounting its > current lack of completion) looks like a very exciting language. Discounting the thing that engenders the most hostility, you're still left with claims like "the first language to do " despite the list of almost antique languages that do for pretty much any value of that is claimed. It's kind of like the hostility UNIX addicts generated when the clueless claimed a series of firsts for it that were ... well, not first. Like hierarchical file systems, which some have seriously tried to claim were introduced by UNIX. Or devices in the file name space. > Sure, > lisp lets you have arbitrary reader macros, but it looks like perl6 > will make syntactic extension a lot more accessible than any of the > lisp dialects I've seen.=20 How much more accessible than, say, a Scheme hygienic macro do you want? Seriously, writing macros in the Lisps is trivial. (Writing them in Dylan was a bit of a pain in the ass because of the impedance mismatch between the Lisp-like macro architecture and the Algol-like language syntax, but even there it was still accessible.) Are you using a different definition for "accessible" than I am here? --=20 Michael T. Richter (GoogleTalk: ttmrichter@gmail.com) Never, ever, ever let systems-level engineers do human interaction design unless they have displayed a proven secondary talent in that area. Their opinion of what represents good human-computer interaction tends to be a bit off-track. (Bruce Tognazzini) --=-azBGevq3qjVCdZz1Eguh Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 15:17 +0900, Martin DeMello wrote:

I don't understand this hostility to perl6, which (discounting its
current lack of completion) looks like a very exciting language.

Discounting the thing that engenders the most hostility, you're still left = with claims like "the first language to do <foo>" despite t= he list of almost antique languages that do <foo> for pretty much any= value of <foo> that is claimed. It's kind of like the hostilit= y UNIX addicts generated when the clueless claimed a series of firsts for i= t that were ... well, not first. Like hierarchical file systems, whic= h some have seriously tried to claim were introduced by UNIX. Or devi= ces in the file name space.

Sure,
lisp lets you have arbitrary reader macros, but it looks like perl6
will make syntactic extension a lot more accessible than any of the
lisp dialects I've seen.=20

How much more accessible than, say, a Scheme hygienic macro do you want?&nb= sp; Seriously, writing macros in the Lisps is trivial. (Writing them = in Dylan was a bit of a pain in the ass because of the impedance mismatch b= etween the Lisp-like macro architecture and the Algol-like language syntax,= but even there it was still accessible.) Are you using a different d= efinition for "accessible" than I am here?

--
Michael T. Richter <ttmri= chter@gmail.com> (GoogleTalk: ttmrichter@gmail.com)
Never, ever, ever let systems-level engineers do human interaction desig= n unless they have displayed a proven secondary talent in that area. Their = opinion of what represents good human-computer interaction tends to be a bi= t off-track. (Bruce Tognazzini)

--=-azBGevq3qjVCdZz1Eguh-- --=-H6NNENhztlBMj4VjEyMb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBIl/bCLqyWkKVQ54QRAu/hAKDM5kBfAzmohJYiPk9E4pdh9P1NnwCfVsoY hJpa5v8nZP7m+m3selh6DeA= =qvja -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-H6NNENhztlBMj4VjEyMb--