On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 7:24 AM, Barry Fishman <barry_fishman@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2013-06-06 03:46:59 EDT, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:26 AM, demerphq <demerphq@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Good thing you are being objective and leaving out the Python 3.0 >>> mess, the long legacy of backwards compatibility in the Perl >>> community, the active community behind it, its extensive portability >>> support, and fail to mention the lack of an equivalent to CPAN. We >>> wouldn't want facts to get in the way of a personal bias would we? >> >> None of that has anything to do with Perl's popularity. >> >>> Just thought I'd push back on the FUD. People have been saying Perl is >>> going away for decades... >> >> Perl has been going away for the last decade [1], and will continue to >> go away. Perl is going away, and that an undeniable fact, and if you >> are not interested in discussing on the basis of reality, I'm not >> interested in discussing with you. >> >> [1] http://www.tiobe.com/content/paperinfo/tpci/images/tpci_trends.png > > I don't think the usefulness of a language should be judged by hits on a > web site. Nobody is judging the usefulness of a language, I have plenty of arguments for that, but this is about popularity. > Personally I would like the Git client to be packaged with as few > dependencies as possible. Right now that seems to require Shell, Sed, > Awk and Perl. The documentation has other requirements, but a prebuild > tar file is available. I would be perfectly fine with replacing shell, sed, awk and perl with ruby. But that's not what you are arguing, is it? -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
