On Thu, 2 Oct 2008, Steve Cayford wrote: > Mike Miller wrote: >> On Thu, 2 Oct 2008, Steve Cayford wrote: >> >>> Dan Rue wrote: >>> >>>> I wouldn't bother with perl unless there's a legacy codebase you are >>>> interested in. They haven't released a new major version in some 10 >>>> years, and I don't think very many people choose it for *new* >>>> projects. It does still have a foothold in the sys admin's tool belt >>>> and is ubiquitous in server environments, but as a language it's >>>> frequently discounted now days for anything beyond glorified shell >>>> scripts. Still worth knowing at least superficially because you will >>>> run into it. >>>> >>> Perl 5.10 just came out last December and both Perl 5 and Perl 6 are >>> under continuing development. Perl's heavily used in a lot of large >>> organizations and CPAN is huge and still growing. >> >> But he said "major version," and I doubt 5.10 counts as major. He >> isn't the only person telling me this. > > The Perl developers call it a major version, I'd say that counts. > > The difference between Perl 5 and Perl 6 is more than a version change > which is why 6 has taken so long. They actually called Perl 5.10 a "major release" here... http://dev.perl.org/perl5/ ...and a "major upgrade" here: http://dev.perl.org/perl5/news/2007/perl-5.10.0.html Perl 5.10, the first major upgrade to the wildly popular dynamic programming language in over five years ...but they have used the term "mjor release" inconsistently: http://perldoc.perl.org/perlfaq1.html#What-are-Perl-4%2c-Perl-5%2c-or-Perl-6%3f The current major release of Perl is Perl 5, and was released in 1994. For me, it does look like they are spinning their wheels. I remember hearing about Perl 6 before I moved here 7 years ago. Apparently they started the design process 8 years ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perl_6#History But they still have no timeline: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perl_6 Perl 6 has been under development for over eight years. The Perl 6 project has never had a clear timeline, although various contributors have given estimates over the years. In early 2007 Jesse Vincent, the Perl 6 Project Manager said, "The Perl 6 project has no schedule ... one doesn't want to rush a largely volunteer effort to design and implement a worthy successor to Perl 5."[1] 1. http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2007/02/msg120613.html > Hm. My point was not to compare them. My point was that Perl is a great > language and should not be dismissed as only good for "glorified shell > scripts". I don't know if that's a "typical" reaction, but it's an > appropriate one. I agree with that, but the original topic was comparison. All I'm saying is that when someone writes to a group of people asking for comparisons, they end up with people defending what they know. That's not bad though because those defenders are almost always acccurate and knowledgable, as you are. Mike