2 HN users recommended this talk2 months2015score 2
Years with an HN recommendation, 2007–2026
Offered as a pragmatic, convincing counter to the idea that Perl 6 is too strange to use.
Curtis Poe's FOSDEM talk arguing that day-to-day Perl 6 is far simpler than its enthusiasts' talk of exotic features suggests. He compares basic math and string handling across languages.
“Here's a talk I gave at FOSDEM explaining how day-to-day Perl 6 is fairly straightforward and easier than people think” (HN, 2015)
Perl 6 isn't as complex as people make it out to be. I have friends who are race car enthusiasts who could go in to excruciating detail about cars and if you don't know how to drive, it could seem daunting. The reality is that most of us get in to our car and just drive. That's part of the issue with Perl 6: its proponents get very excited about it and write about all the really cool stuff you can do with it, but for those who don't know the language, it sounds intimidating. Here's a talk I gave at FOSDEM explaining how day-to-day Perl 6 is fairly straightforward and easier than people think: [this video]
FOSDEM talk showing day-to-day Perl 6 is straightforward.
The typing and grammar mechanism aren't common, it may influence other languages. Also, Perl managed to survive even without mainstream relevance so the community will probably keep enjoying it. ps: I found this talk pretty convincing about pragmatism [this video] also: [link]
> [lang X] doesn't handle [basic math] correctly among other things. From a recent talk[1], what are x, y, z in the following? x = 7 ÷ 2; y = -7 ÷ 2; z = .1 + .2 - .3 x y z 3.5 -3.5 0 # human 3 ? tiny number # c89; ? depends on compiler 3 -4 tiny number # ruby 3 -4 tiny number # python 2/3 3 -3 0 # bc 3.5 -3.5 tiny number # perl5 3.5 -3.5 0 # perl6 ---- It isn't just basic math. How "long" is the following string? ปฏิบัติจริง 7 characters # human len("ปฏิบัติจริง") = 33 # python 2 len("ปฏิบัติจริง") = 11 # python 3 "ปฏิบัติจริง".length = ? # ruby (For Ruby, I've found "the core language does not provide a way to count [human perceived characters]". [3] Is that still correct or out of date?) ---- > Perl suffers from having too many magical operators that makes it hard to reason about a snippet of code. I feel Python strikes the right balance. To quote Larry Wall, "Perl 6 ... has been rethought and rebalanced on every level".[4] It might be interesting for you to pick a couple Perl 5 operators that you consider too magical; then we could look at the merits and demerits of those ops in Perl 5 and their equivalents in Python and Perl 6. > It's very easy to express ideas I have in mind without worrying about the details [of Python, now, and Perl, back in the day] This, of course, has explicitly been a deliberate focus of all the Perls. Part of the point of Perl 6 was to remove the bits in Perl 5 that were problematic (including some "too cute/weird" stuff) and to introduce much ni
Talk comparing basic math and string handling across languages.
Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.
3 Hacker News comments
From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.
Read more
Citations, criticism and jokes
Read more