![]() |
VOOZH | about |
We’re so glad you’re here. You can expect all the best TNS content to arrive Monday through Friday to keep you on top of the news and at the top of your game.
Check your inbox for a confirmation email where you can adjust your preferences and even join additional groups.
Follow TNS on your favorite social media networks.
Become a TNS follower on LinkedIn.
Check out the latest featured and trending stories while you wait for your first TNS newsletter.
Earlier this year, we saw the introduction of Perl 7, with the new version billed as mostly just Perl 5.32, “but with different, saner, more modern defaults.” Of course, while that’s true, there is some general disagreement to be found among the Perl community and some who are, according to Perl Foundation board member Ricardo Signes asking “what the hell is going on?”
LWN.net recently drew some attention to the topic of “the proposed Perl 7 fork” (a characterization that some in the comments took issue with, preferring that Raku be identified as such), posting a full response by Signes to a Perl emailing list answering just that question.
While, as we noted, Perl 7 was introduced with a tone that seemed to say not much was changing, the core idea of moving to version 7 was true that the language could move beyond some past restrictions. Such changes, you might expect, are met with resistance and confusion, and this case is no exception. “The central Perl 7 question is not about version numbering, but rather about backward compatibility guarantees,” Signes writes in his response. “Maybe there are kinds of backward compatibility that can be shrugged off without disrupting the vast majority of Perl users, while making the language easier to use and (very importantly) easy to *continue* to improve. This is obviously the core hope of the Perl 7 plan.”
People think my personal choice of programming language is controversial. Wait until they hear my preference in spaces vs tab…
— Jaana Dogan (@rakyll) August 13, 2020
The question of breaking compatibility, however, is just the first point of contention, he notes before moving on to the second — if it should be broken, then how? On this point, a passage from Signes’s message stands out:
“There is not yet a consensus here, seemingly among any two people. There is not a cabal of people saying ‘let’s all break these five things we agree on, quick, before anybody can stop us.’ I think sometimes it smells that way, but I have been in the discussions about what we can and should change, and why, and there is no unified front,” he writes. “The big agreement is, if anything, ‘Changing the version numbering to make it clear when to expect breaking changes is reasonable.'”
The plan, he writes, “is to come up with a plan,” for which the Perl Steering Committee has been formed (or at least is in the process of doing so) and Signes offers some words of assurance to those who may question the languages movement toward Perl 7, the next version that isn’t quite so simply agreeable as it may have initially seemed on the surface.
“You should not expect to see a stream of unjustified dictates issuing forth from some secret body on high. You should expect to see perl5-porters operating as it generally did: with proposals coming to the list, getting discussion, and then being thumbed up or down by the project manager,” writes Signes. “This is what has been happening for years, already. Some proposals were already discussed by the project manager and some were not. If you eliminated any named mailing list for doing this, it would still happen. The PSC is a means to say that there is a default group for such discussions.”
If you’re looking for further assurance, fellow Perl Foundation board member Curtis “Ovid” Poe also offers his opinion on the move to Perl 7 in an interview, saying that he is “100% on board with the project” and noting that “there’s a difference between having a goal and having a plan. There’s widespread agreement on the goal, but there’s less agreement about the plan. That’s great so long as people can use this to find the best path.”
Why do developers who don’t code in their spare time get so much hate?
Imagine if we did that to other professions. “Fred is a terrible brain surgeon because he does NO surgeries in his home after hours..”
— Randall Kanna (@RandallKanna) August 10, 2020
“We’re in a 4-week sprint and this story has 13 points”
“Mercury is in retrograde and all air signs will have relationship troubles”
Find the difference. I dare you
— Kat Maddox (@ctrlshifti) August 14, 2020
The web started going downhill when we stopped using cgi-bin.
— Ben Ramsey (@ramsey) August 10, 2020
Feature image by Suzanne D. Williams on Unsplash.