Parrot is a foundering project on top of a wonderful vision.
will at coleda.com
Tue Sep 6 17:36:49 UTC 2011
Will "Coke" Coleda
On Sep 6, 2011, at 9:40, Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm very strongly in favor of this new idea and am looking forward to
> getting started on some of the necessary work that needs to be done.
> There are some things that need to be broken so they can be re-made
> better. Just off the top of my head, things like PCC, Exceptions, MMD
> and the object model are going to need some disruptive changes in the
> coming months, and having the freedom to pursue the correct course of
> action without having to wait months at a time for deprecation periods
> to elapse is good. Relying on abstraction layers like NQP and Winxed
> are going to be extremely important during this time.
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Jimmy Zhuo <jimmy.zhuo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I agree with cotto, I don't even think parrot needs a deprecation
>> policy right now since parrot is not stable enough. And I don't think
>> parrot should keep lua/partcl working on parrot any new release.
> Lua has been extremely stable in the past. It works now and has worked
> for a long time. It also tends to be very easy to maintain. I don't
> think we need to drop Lua support for any reason, and having it around
> is a good thing. We may want to start transitioning it away from being
> written in so much PIR code, but that's something we can talk about in
> the future. Having a working Lua brings us several benefits, including
> a new dimension of testability, the ability to test language interop
> (you need at least two HLLs to test interop, and we have working Lua
> right now), etc.
> If the new Partcl is written in NQP, and if we're going to try and
> keep NQP stable, partcl should continue to be mostly stable. Mostly. I
> don't know its current status but I do know that historically it has
> been more fragile than Lua. If we have people who are interested in
> working on it, we should continue to support that effort. If not, we
I'll keep partcl (PIR) and partcl-nqp running, though collaborators are very welcome.
>> and then what parrot's goal? In my opinion, I think it should be
>> making rakudo better on parrot, keeping winxed working, and then
>> making parrot better for other languages.
> That's a great point. We do need to improve the Rakudo experience.
> That needs to be a big focus of our efforts in the coming months.
> It's been said before that Parrot development moves too slow for
> Rakudo, and that is the very first thing that should change. Parrot
> should be moving quickly enough for Rakudo to have necessary changes
> added to Parrot core with minimal effort. Obviously we need to find
> ways to take the things Rakudo needs and present them in a way that
> can be usable by other languages. Our biggest user right now is
> Rakudo, and they also happen to be one of the bigger drivers of
> improvements at the Parrot level. We need to make it easier for their
> changes and their needs to be added to the core Parrot repo.
> --Andrew Whitworth
More information about the parrot-dev