Comments on Compiling Rules and Modules.TypePad2006-03-14T01:36:04Zaudreythttps://pugs.blogs.com/pugs/tag:typepad.com,2003:https://pugs.blogs.com/pugs/2006/03/compiling_rules/comments/atom.xml/kaa commented on 'Compiling Rules and Modules.'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451e8fb69e200d834b1900d69e22006-03-14T09:41:22Z2007-08-18T06:54:48ZkaaI belive, nothing is really 'frozen'? but some parts (flow control, function definition/call syntax, rules, OO) are less likely to...<p>I belive, nothing is really 'frozen'? but some parts (flow control, function definition/call syntax, rules, OO) are less likely to change than the others (marcos). Some things are underspecced/unspecced (threads, builtins, embedding, distro/libraries).</p>
<p>Most work is now concentrated on bridging the gap between Pugs/lrep (parsers/interpreters, 'high level' implementations of P6) and Parrot 'the VM'; and bootstrapping (by moving Pugs/lrep infrastructures gradually from Haskell/p5 to p6).</p>
<p>That's what I gather from blogs here and lurking on perl6-* lists.</p>grumpY! commented on 'Compiling Rules and Modules.'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451e8fb69e200d8347c2e8753ef2006-03-14T06:22:29Z2007-08-18T06:53:02ZgrumpY!i'm almost starting to get confused here. once again, great posts audrey. BUT i am starting to get a little...<p>i'm almost starting to get confused here. once again, great posts audrey. BUT i am starting to get a little dizzy and can't fully grok:</p>
<p>- what current perl6 syntax pugs supports<br />
- what current perl6 syntax itself is frozen<br />
- how far we need to go with pugs<br />
- the who/what/where about cutting over to parrot<br />
- how exactly the perl5 filter fits in</p>
<p>in other words, i need to be de-idiotized with a state of the onion (but a real state of the onion, not the usual comedy routines larry puts on), and i suspect lots of other people do too.</p>