Did you find it disappointing because of MoarVM specifically, or because of the realized loss of potential from Parrot?
Did you find it disappointing because of MoarVM specifically, or because of the realized loss of potential from Parrot? Several reasons, in no particular order. One, because of the deliberate driving off of Parrot developers and their knowledge about what works and what doesn't work for building a VM for a Perl. (Sure, you can believe that I feel a little personal betrayal there, but there's also a concern that the Rakudo developers were taking on yet another project for which the bus number is, as usual, abysmally low.) Two, because the resulting design (when I looked at it) was adequate, at best. I believe it won't compete with fast VMs without a serious change in its architecture, and no amount of magical thinking about how a GSoC student will build a JIT in 10 weeks will fix that. Three, because it represents yet another example of NIH thinking and throwing out working code in favor of spending even more time building something new from scratch. Four, because it set back the P6 release date by at least 18 months, if not years. Five, because all it represented when I looked at it was the kind of code shuffling that Parrot could easily have done in the past three years, without doing anything much else (such as make the architecture improvements we'd begun to design and prototype). One fact often forgotten in all of the nonsense about how "Parrot lost its focus and thus its purpose" is that Parrot was, from the start, intended to run at least both Perl and P6 simultaneously in the same process without embedding libperl.so .
Posted by chromatic on May 27, 2014, 9:48 PM
Tags
Related issues
- > Because they don't believe the disasters were inflicted by them.
- Hehe, yeah I'm not sure when John Stewart would have worked there or what the pain points were for him, but he worked there for a bit.
- https://www.apple.com/shop/product/mxcl3ll/a/magic-keyboard-...
- If first-order hybrids made up only a small proportion of the total population of humans and Neanderthals, then the probability that a pa...
- Well, I'd be interested to hear what some of those nuances are, personally.
- My biggest Amazon annoyance.
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.9,500 issues0 comments
hackernews (E-commerce)
> Because they don't believe the disasters were inflicted by them.
Hehe, yeah I'm not sure when John Stewart would have worked there or what the pain points were for him, but he worked there for a bit.
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/mxcl3ll/a/magic-keyboard-...
If first-order hybrids made up only a small proportion of the total population of humans and Neanderthals, then the probability that a pa...
Well, I'd be interested to hear what some of those nuances are, personally.
My biggest Amazon annoyance.
> There's not really an unmet need for innovation in broadband delivery; the issue is running new wires broadband has costs, and in a lot...
Speaking of Amazon's account process, I have a really annoying problem with theirs.
Did you find it disappointing because of MoarVM specifically, or because of the realized loss of potential from Parrot?
Did you find it disappointing because of MoarVM specifically, or because of the realized loss of potential from Parrot? Several reasons, in no particular order. One, because of the deliberate driving off of Parrot developers and their knowledge about what works and what doesn't work for building a VM for a Perl. (Sure, you can believe that I feel a little personal betrayal there, but there's also a concern that the Rakudo developers were taking on yet another project for which the bus number is, as usual, abysmally low.) Two, because the resulting design (when I looked at it) was adequate, at best. I believe it won't compete with fast VMs without a serious change in its architecture, and no amount of magical thinking about how a GSoC student will build a JIT in 10 weeks will fix that. Three, because it represents yet another example of NIH thinking and throwing out working code in favor of spending even more time building something new from scratch. Four, because it set back the P6 release date by at least 18 months, if not years. Five, because all it represented when I looked at it was the kind of code shuffling that Parrot could easily have done in the past three years, without doing anything much else (such as make the architecture improvements we'd begun to design and prototype). One fact often forgotten in all of the nonsense about how "Parrot lost its focus and thus its purpose" is that Parrot was, from the start, intended to run at least both Perl and P6 simultaneously in the same process without embedding libperl.so .
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.