[Dbix-class] 4/5 Why Matt's proposal is a farce

[Matt S Trout]

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 06:59:24PM +0200, Peter Rabbitson wrote:
> On 10/12/2016 06:43 PM, Christian Walde wrote:
> >I'm a little confused here. I saw a talk that: Starts with a sentence
> >stating "this is crazy stuff", contains the phrase "hackometer status:
> >melted" and ends on the note of "play with this".
> >
> >How did you get "considered fit for every day use" out of this?
> 
> https://youtu.be/j3r-lKlrrRg?t=1026
> 
> "... And I wanted to use this for IRC scripting, and I am not
> recompiling my entire frigging IRC rig against a different perl in
> order to do that..."
> 
> Seems like a case of everyday use to me.

I'm sorry? Are you seriously saying that you believe that my being willing
to dogfood some perl6 stuff for minor scripting of my irssi setup should
be taken as an endorsement that the code in question is fit for every day
use in general?

Traditionally, one finds ways to dogfood stuff explicitly *because* the code
isn't ready and trying it out oneself is the way to irish mine clear the most
egregious problems, so this interpretation seems deeply strange to me.

-- 
Matt S Trout - Shadowcat Systems - Perl consulting with a commit bit and a clue

http://shadowcat.co.uk/blog/matt-s-trout/   http://twitter.com/shadowcat_mst/

Email me now on mst (at) shadowcat.co.uk and let's chat about how our CPAN
commercial support, training and consultancy packages could help your team.