On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 10:12:11PM +0200, demerphq wrote:
> On 9/10/07, Nicholas Clark <nick ccl4.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 10:03:04PM +0200, demerphq
wrote:
> > > On 9/10/07, Artur Bergman <skycrucially.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sep 10, 2007, at 12:50 PM, demerphq
wrote:
> >
> > > > It was, we left the innovation to Perl
6.
> > >
> > > Well, this doesn't seem to have been a good
strategy.*
> >
> > It was a damn good idea at the time.
> >
> > Without it Perl 5 would have descended into
massive flame wars about batshit
> > innovation versus backwards compatibility, without
anything actually getting
> > done.
> >
> > As it was, it freed up the competent people to get
5.6 out. And then 5.8 out.
>
> Ok, fine. Then let me rephrase: it seems this strategy
is no longer in
> the best interests of the community.
I can wholeheartedly agree with that. Probably it had done
the trick by about
2002.
Nicholas Clark
|