Ask HN: Why hasn't Perl 6 taken off yet?

Re:Ask HN: Why hasn't Perl 6 taken off yet? by lucb1e on Monday November 07, 2016 @01:52AM (#12889376)

You'll have to elaborate, just saying "this is better" is useless.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Why hasn't Perl 6 taken off yet? by IslaDeEncanta on Monday November 07, 2016 @02:02AM (#12889407)

Perl 5 is a more expressive and logically consistent language than Perl 6. If I want something Perlish, I'm using Perl 5 no matter what.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Why hasn't Perl 6 taken off yet? by rurban on Monday November 07, 2016 @04:21AM (#12889805)

This is completely wrong. Perl 6 is a much more expressive and logically consistent language than Perl 5.

On the other hand Perl 5 is faster for normal usage, and has mature library support, while perl6 has to catchup a lot. Perl 5 is only slower with their not-existing/silly object systems (Moose), there Perl 6 is much better.

Many perl5 devs just don't want to learn a new language yet.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Why hasn't Perl 6 taken off yet? by berntb on Monday November 07, 2016 @04:28AM (#12889820)

I'll agree with the rest, but not about Moose. It is not Perl 6, but is still probably better than most other scripting language OO systems.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Why hasn't Perl 6 taken off yet? by Ulti on Monday November 07, 2016 @07:10AM (#12890455)

Not for performance which is what I think rurban was getting at.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Why hasn't Perl 6 taken off yet? by rurban on Monday November 07, 2016 @07:33AM (#12890541)

Performance and syntax. features are almost OK, despite the type system.

Syntax: It explicitly deviates from perl6 and could have looked much cleaner.

[ Parent | on HN ]