why we need perl6 if we have parrort?

Discussion in 'Perl Misc' started by sonet, Jun 22, 2007.

  1. sonet

    sonet Guest

    If every dynamically languages (such as Perl6 and Python...)
    will convert to PIR and automatically converted inside Parrot to
    PBC (Parrot Bytecode).

    1.Why we need perl6 ? We can learn how to coding in PIR direct.

    2.Why not convert perl5 to PIR (convert to Parrot bytecode)?
    sonet, Jun 22, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. sonet

    brian d foy Guest

    In article <f5gq36$rme$>, sonet
    <> wrote:

    > If every dynamically languages (such as Perl6 and Python...)
    > will convert to PIR and automatically converted inside Parrot to
    > PBC (Parrot Bytecode).
    >
    > 1.Why we need perl6 ? We can learn how to coding in PIR direct.


    For the same reason we have Java instead of programming in Java
    bytecode: higher level languages condense higher level concepts into
    keywords that represent a lot of behind-the-scenese lower-level code.


    > 2.Why not convert perl5 to PIR (convert to Parrot bytecode)?


    Some people were working on that with PONIE (Perl On New Interpreter
    Image), but those are also the same people doing Perl 6 / parrot
    things.

    There's a lot more to Perl 6 than just using parrot for its interpreter.

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
    brian d foy, Jun 22, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. brian d foy wrote:
    > In article <f5gq36$rme$>, sonet
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> If every dynamically languages (such as Perl6 and Python...)
    >> will convert to PIR and automatically converted inside Parrot to
    >> PBC (Parrot Bytecode).
    >>
    >> 1.Why we need perl6 ? We can learn how to coding in PIR direct.

    >
    > For the same reason we have Java instead of programming in Java
    > bytecode: higher level languages condense higher level concepts into
    > keywords that represent a lot of behind-the-scenese lower-level code.
    >
    >
    >> 2.Why not convert perl5 to PIR (convert to Parrot bytecode)?

    >
    > Some people were working on that with PONIE (Perl On New Interpreter
    > Image), but those are also the same people doing Perl 6 / parrot
    > things.
    >
    > There's a lot more to Perl 6 than just using parrot for its
    > interpreter.


    Why did they go with parrot instead of just augmenting the existing Perl
    interpreter. Using Parrot (or any 3rd party interpreter) just kinda maks
    it feel less like Perl in a way; not as "pure" as Perl5 and ealier :)
    Clenna Lumina, Jun 22, 2007
    #3
  4. On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 23:32:22 +0800, "sonet" <>
    wrote:

    >1.Why we need perl6 ? We can learn how to coding in PIR direct.


    Why we need C? We can learn how to coding in assembler direct.

    >2.Why not convert perl5 to PIR (convert to Parrot bytecode)?


    5.12


    Michele
    --
    {$_=pack'B8'x25,unpack'A8'x32,$a^=sub{pop^pop}->(map substr
    (($a||=join'',map--$|x$_,(unpack'w',unpack'u','G^<R<Y]*YB='
    ..'KYU;*EVH[.FHF2W+#"\Z*5TI/ER<Z`S(G.DZZ9OX0Z')=~/./g)x2,$_,
    256),7,249);s/[^\w,]/ /g;$ \=/^J/?$/:"\r";print,redo}#JAPH,
    Michele Dondi, Jun 22, 2007
    #4
  5. On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 11:41:03 -0700, "Clenna Lumina"
    <> wrote:

    >Why did they go with parrot instead of just augmenting the existing Perl
    >interpreter. Using Parrot (or any 3rd party interpreter) just kinda maks


    Because the existing Perl interpreter has already been augmented to a
    point that the language proper is defined by the implementation, and
    hacking the latter is far from being a trivial task.

    >it feel less like Perl in a way; not as "pure" as Perl5 and ealier :)


    Because Perl 5 already runs on a bytecode, but with shortcomings.
    Parrot aims at clearly separating the two levels...


    Michele
    --
    {$_=pack'B8'x25,unpack'A8'x32,$a^=sub{pop^pop}->(map substr
    (($a||=join'',map--$|x$_,(unpack'w',unpack'u','G^<R<Y]*YB='
    ..'KYU;*EVH[.FHF2W+#"\Z*5TI/ER<Z`S(G.DZZ9OX0Z')=~/./g)x2,$_,
    256),7,249);s/[^\w,]/ /g;$ \=/^J/?$/:"\r";print,redo}#JAPH,
    Michele Dondi, Jun 22, 2007
    #5
  6. sonet

    Uri Guttman Guest

    >>>>> "SP" == Sherm Pendley <> writes:

    SP> "Clenna Lumina" <> writes:
    >> Why did they go with parrot instead of just augmenting the existing Perl
    >> interpreter.


    SP> Because the existing code base is huge and brittle - as a result
    SP> of twenty- odd years since Perl 1 of "just augmenting" it. There
    SP> was a very real need to do a major ground-up rewrite.

    actually perl5 was a complete rewrite by larry and didn't share any
    source code with perl4.

    uri

    --
    Uri Guttman ------ -------- http://www.stemsystems.com
    --Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding-
    Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org
    Uri Guttman, Jun 22, 2007
    #6
  7. Sherm Pendley <> wrote:
    > Michele Dondi <> writes:
    >
    >> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 23:32:22 +0800, "sonet" <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>1.Why we need perl6 ? We can learn how to coding in PIR direct.

    >>
    >> Why we need C? We can learn how to coding in assembler direct.

    >
    > Why do we need assembler? We can learn how to coding by flipping toggle
    > switches on an operator console.



    Why do we need switches? We can learn how to coding by whistling
    into a modem.


    --
    Tad McClellan
    email: perl -le "print scalar reverse qq/moc.noitatibaher\100cmdat/"
    Tad McClellan, Jun 23, 2007
    #7
  8. On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:38:22 -0400, Sherm Pendley
    <> wrote:

    >> Why we need C? We can learn how to coding in assembler direct.

    >
    >Why do we need assembler? We can learn how to coding by flipping toggle
    >switches on an operator console.


    Nope. I'm waiting for isolinear chips. Computer?


    Michele
    --
    {$_=pack'B8'x25,unpack'A8'x32,$a^=sub{pop^pop}->(map substr
    (($a||=join'',map--$|x$_,(unpack'w',unpack'u','G^<R<Y]*YB='
    ..'KYU;*EVH[.FHF2W+#"\Z*5TI/ER<Z`S(G.DZZ9OX0Z')=~/./g)x2,$_,
    256),7,249);s/[^\w,]/ /g;$ \=/^J/?$/:"\r";print,redo}#JAPH,
    Michele Dondi, Jun 23, 2007
    #8
  9. [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    Uri Guttman
    <>], who wrote in article <>:
    > SP> Because the existing code base is huge and brittle - as a result
    > SP> of twenty- odd years since Perl 1 of "just augmenting" it. There
    > SP> was a very real need to do a major ground-up rewrite.


    > actually perl5 was a complete rewrite by larry and didn't share any
    > source code with perl4.


    Wrong. Perl5 was incremenental - with a major part of code
    "incremented", so the intersection is not very big. Nevertheless, we
    hunted bugs caused by those "remnants" for many years, until Perl5
    started to "more or less work".

    Hope this helps,
    Ilya
    Ilya Zakharevich, Jun 23, 2007
    #9
  10. Uri Guttman wrote:
    >>>>>> "SP" == Sherm Pendley <> writes:

    >
    >> "Clenna Lumina" <> writes:
    > >> Why did they go with parrot instead of just augmenting the

    > existing Perl >> interpreter.
    >
    >> Because the existing code base is huge and brittle - as a result
    >> of twenty- odd years since Perl 1 of "just augmenting" it. There
    >> was a very real need to do a major ground-up rewrite.

    >
    > actually perl5 was a complete rewrite by larry and didn't share any
    > source code with perl4.


    That is what I was getting at. Perl 5 was a complete rewrite in and of
    itself, so why extend that existing base (keeping it more "pure" if you
    will.)
    Clenna Lumina, Jun 25, 2007
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Kiwi

    Perl6.NET?

    Kiwi, Oct 19, 2003, in forum: Perl
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    565
    Andrew Shitov
    Oct 20, 2003
  2. ugly
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    497
  3. Mr. SweatyFinger

    why why why why why

    Mr. SweatyFinger, Nov 28, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    863
    Mark Rae
    Dec 21, 2006
  4. Mr. SweatyFinger
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,762
    Smokey Grindel
    Dec 2, 2006
  5. Charles Comstock

    perl6 grammar rules in ruby

    Charles Comstock, Mar 1, 2004, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    211
    gabriele renzi
    Mar 5, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page