Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 20 Nov 1996 17:17:32 +0600
From:      Tim Pierce <twpierce@bio-3.bsd.uchicago.edu>
To:        terry@lambert.org
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Who needs Perl?  We do!
Message-ID:  <9611202317.AA08856@bio-5.bsd.uchicago.edu>
In-Reply-To: <199611201826.LAA11457@phaeton.artisoft.com> (message from Terry Lambert on Wed, 20 Nov 1996 11:26:32 -0700 (MST))

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
> Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 11:26:32 -0700 (MST)
> 
> Has PERL syntax reached the top end of the inverse expotential curve
> yet?  If the last major rev is any indicator, the answer is "no".  8-(.
> 
> When it starts to stagnate, then it will be safe. 8-).

Again, the last major release of Perl was over two years ago, and
since then the syntax has changed minimally (if at all, which I
doubt).  In fact, the reason given then for the watershed changes
in Perl 5.000 was to attempt to "freeze" the basic Perl code base,
and encourage extending the language through modules rather than
kludging the interpreter.

Perl has stagnated more in the last two years than FreeBSD has.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9611202317.AA08856>