<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_06_196202</id>
	<title>The Perl 6 Advent Calendar</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1260127980000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Larry Wall wasn't joking when he said that Perl 6 would be ready by Christmas. Perhaps not <em>this</em> Christmas, but that hasn't stopped a group of people (including head <a href="http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6/index.cgi?rakudo">Rakudo</a> developers Patrick Michaud and Jonathan Worthington) from putting together an <a href="http://perl6advent.wordpress.com/">Advent Calendar</a>, featuring one cool Perl 6 feature every day until Christmas. Topics currently covered include <a href="http://perl6advent.wordpress.com/2009/12/01/day-1-getting-rakudo/">how to get and build Rakudo</a> (the most actively developed and progressed implementation of Perl 6) and the new <a href="http://perl6advent.wordpress.com/2009/12/05/day-5-metaoperator/">Metaoperators</a>. For those wondering when Perl 6 will be finished: Rakudo will be having its official 'production release' (dubbed <a href="http://use.perl.org/~pmichaud/journal/39411">Rakudo Star</a>) April 2010."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Larry Wall was n't joking when he said that Perl 6 would be ready by Christmas .
Perhaps not this Christmas , but that has n't stopped a group of people ( including head Rakudo developers Patrick Michaud and Jonathan Worthington ) from putting together an Advent Calendar , featuring one cool Perl 6 feature every day until Christmas .
Topics currently covered include how to get and build Rakudo ( the most actively developed and progressed implementation of Perl 6 ) and the new Metaoperators .
For those wondering when Perl 6 will be finished : Rakudo will be having its official 'production release ' ( dubbed Rakudo Star ) April 2010 .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Larry Wall wasn't joking when he said that Perl 6 would be ready by Christmas.
Perhaps not this Christmas, but that hasn't stopped a group of people (including head Rakudo developers Patrick Michaud and Jonathan Worthington) from putting together an Advent Calendar, featuring one cool Perl 6 feature every day until Christmas.
Topics currently covered include how to get and build Rakudo (the most actively developed and progressed implementation of Perl 6) and the new Metaoperators.
For those wondering when Perl 6 will be finished: Rakudo will be having its official 'production release' (dubbed Rakudo Star) April 2010.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30363230</id>
	<title>Re:What is Perl 6 anyway?</title>
	<author>wayland</author>
	<datestamp>1260269880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>Mod Parent Up</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod Parent Up</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod Parent Up</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30363050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345638</id>
	<title>Evil number</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1260092220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>6 seems to be the number of the thing you want, is about to come, and takes forever to finally come, if ever. Is not a coincidence that the number of the devil is 666, should be an unlisted sin or punishment in hell that forever waiting for something that from the start was promised to come soon. IPV6 is another much wanted "imminent" upgrade that will take still a big while to come, and i bet that Duke Nukem Forever was planned to get out in the 6th iteration. I hope that PHP6 dont takes the same fate as Perl and comes when scheduled.<br><br>Anyway, between waiting and getting a half-baked product, with problems that will avoid it being ever widely adopted, i prefer to wait till is really done.</htmltext>
<tokenext>6 seems to be the number of the thing you want , is about to come , and takes forever to finally come , if ever .
Is not a coincidence that the number of the devil is 666 , should be an unlisted sin or punishment in hell that forever waiting for something that from the start was promised to come soon .
IPV6 is another much wanted " imminent " upgrade that will take still a big while to come , and i bet that Duke Nukem Forever was planned to get out in the 6th iteration .
I hope that PHP6 dont takes the same fate as Perl and comes when scheduled.Anyway , between waiting and getting a half-baked product , with problems that will avoid it being ever widely adopted , i prefer to wait till is really done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>6 seems to be the number of the thing you want, is about to come, and takes forever to finally come, if ever.
Is not a coincidence that the number of the devil is 666, should be an unlisted sin or punishment in hell that forever waiting for something that from the start was promised to come soon.
IPV6 is another much wanted "imminent" upgrade that will take still a big while to come, and i bet that Duke Nukem Forever was planned to get out in the 6th iteration.
I hope that PHP6 dont takes the same fate as Perl and comes when scheduled.Anyway, between waiting and getting a half-baked product, with problems that will avoid it being ever widely adopted, i prefer to wait till is really done.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345600</id>
	<title>Re:Coming of the (perl) Messiah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260091980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It has taken just as long as Python 3000. Guido started work on in it in 2000, still not 'finished'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It has taken just as long as Python 3000 .
Guido started work on in it in 2000 , still not 'finished' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has taken just as long as Python 3000.
Guido started work on in it in 2000, still not 'finished'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345242</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347006</id>
	<title>Re:perl 5 versus ruby versus perl 6</title>
	<author>Lazy Jones</author>
	<datestamp>1260102300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If I was going to change to something other than perl 5, I would need some motivation. The clearest motivation I can see is that OOP in perl 5 is ugly and bolted on.</p></div><p>
How about multithreading then? It's not only ugly and bolted on, it incurs so much overhead that it's basically useless wherever performance matters at all. I use Gearman now (rationale: might as well take something with the ability to use multiple systems / load balance / redundancy if you are taking such a performance hit), but it would be so much better if we could just have acceptable multithreading like a bunch of other languages (Java family incl. Scala, C/C++ if you are a masochist etc.).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I was going to change to something other than perl 5 , I would need some motivation .
The clearest motivation I can see is that OOP in perl 5 is ugly and bolted on .
How about multithreading then ?
It 's not only ugly and bolted on , it incurs so much overhead that it 's basically useless wherever performance matters at all .
I use Gearman now ( rationale : might as well take something with the ability to use multiple systems / load balance / redundancy if you are taking such a performance hit ) , but it would be so much better if we could just have acceptable multithreading like a bunch of other languages ( Java family incl .
Scala , C/C + + if you are a masochist etc .
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I was going to change to something other than perl 5, I would need some motivation.
The clearest motivation I can see is that OOP in perl 5 is ugly and bolted on.
How about multithreading then?
It's not only ugly and bolted on, it incurs so much overhead that it's basically useless wherever performance matters at all.
I use Gearman now (rationale: might as well take something with the ability to use multiple systems / load balance / redundancy if you are taking such a performance hit), but it would be so much better if we could just have acceptable multithreading like a bunch of other languages (Java family incl.
Scala, C/C++ if you are a masochist etc.
).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345614</id>
	<title>I first heard Perl 6 when I was in high school</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260092100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember my classmates talked about Perl 6 and the Perl Virtual Machine when I was in High school. Now I'm graduating from college, and Perl 6 still hasn't been released.</p><p>Back that time he used Perl while I sticked with Python. Funny how time slips away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember my classmates talked about Perl 6 and the Perl Virtual Machine when I was in High school .
Now I 'm graduating from college , and Perl 6 still has n't been released.Back that time he used Perl while I sticked with Python .
Funny how time slips away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember my classmates talked about Perl 6 and the Perl Virtual Machine when I was in High school.
Now I'm graduating from college, and Perl 6 still hasn't been released.Back that time he used Perl while I sticked with Python.
Funny how time slips away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30370360</id>
	<title>Re:What is Perl 6 anyway?</title>
	<author>spinclad</author>
	<datestamp>1260267000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>mod parent up: informative and accurate (modulo Parrot Foundation owning Parrot).<br>+1 to anonymous coward (Matthew Walton)'s reply.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>mod parent up : informative and accurate ( modulo Parrot Foundation owning Parrot ) . + 1 to anonymous coward ( Matthew Walton ) 's reply .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mod parent up: informative and accurate (modulo Parrot Foundation owning Parrot).+1 to anonymous coward (Matthew Walton)'s reply.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30363050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346522</id>
	<title>Re:still relevant?</title>
	<author>ThePhilips</author>
	<datestamp>1260098760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> do perl afficionados think that this new version will enjoy the success that its predecessors have had?</p> </div><p> Why should I care?

</p><p> I use Perl5 because it is perfect fit for what it is. If Perl6 would catch might attention, I might consider trying it too.

</p><p> Perl isn't about gathering design awards or topping charts. It's a robust tool for an array of *NIX related tasks. And not only.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>do perl afficionados think that this new version will enjoy the success that its predecessors have had ?
Why should I care ?
I use Perl5 because it is perfect fit for what it is .
If Perl6 would catch might attention , I might consider trying it too .
Perl is n't about gathering design awards or topping charts .
It 's a robust tool for an array of * NIX related tasks .
And not only .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> do perl afficionados think that this new version will enjoy the success that its predecessors have had?
Why should I care?
I use Perl5 because it is perfect fit for what it is.
If Perl6 would catch might attention, I might consider trying it too.
Perl isn't about gathering design awards or topping charts.
It's a robust tool for an array of *NIX related tasks.
And not only.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345334</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346840</id>
	<title>Other Advent Calendars...</title>
	<author>sjstrutt</author>
	<datestamp>1260101100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://24ways.org/" title="24ways.org" rel="nofollow">24 ways</a> [24ways.org] takes a general forus on web development while <a href="http://phpadvent.org/2009" title="phpadvent.org" rel="nofollow">PHP Advent</a> [phpadvent.org] is supposed to be [1] more PHP focused.
<br> <br>
[1] Though that doesn't seem to *actually* be the case...</htmltext>
<tokenext>24 ways [ 24ways.org ] takes a general forus on web development while PHP Advent [ phpadvent.org ] is supposed to be [ 1 ] more PHP focused .
[ 1 ] Though that does n't seem to * actually * be the case.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>24 ways [24ways.org] takes a general forus on web development while PHP Advent [phpadvent.org] is supposed to be [1] more PHP focused.
[1] Though that doesn't seem to *actually* be the case...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346054</id>
	<title>Re:This has taken too long</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260095880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shipping is a feature.  A really important one.  Your product has to have it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shipping is a feature .
A really important one .
Your product has to have it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shipping is a feature.
A really important one.
Your product has to have it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346040</id>
	<title>Re:perl 5 versus ruby versus perl 6</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260095760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It might just be because I'm not a very experienced Perl programmer, but I find the libraries in the ruby community to be easier to find, easier to use, and of generally higher quality. Could you point me to some examples of libraries that you use in Perl but could not find in Ruby?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It might just be because I 'm not a very experienced Perl programmer , but I find the libraries in the ruby community to be easier to find , easier to use , and of generally higher quality .
Could you point me to some examples of libraries that you use in Perl but could not find in Ruby ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It might just be because I'm not a very experienced Perl programmer, but I find the libraries in the ruby community to be easier to find, easier to use, and of generally higher quality.
Could you point me to some examples of libraries that you use in Perl but could not find in Ruby?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345268</id>
	<title>PERL went the way of the dodo...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260132600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...it's too late for PERL. The system and kernel engineers chose to stick with C, PHP ran all over it with less cryptic syntax, and all the web 2.0 "me too" morons are now hacking away in Ruby and Python.</p><p>But really, PERL's demise was PHP. Especially since the CLI version of PHP, turning him into a true general purpose language.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...it 's too late for PERL .
The system and kernel engineers chose to stick with C , PHP ran all over it with less cryptic syntax , and all the web 2.0 " me too " morons are now hacking away in Ruby and Python.But really , PERL 's demise was PHP .
Especially since the CLI version of PHP , turning him into a true general purpose language .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...it's too late for PERL.
The system and kernel engineers chose to stick with C, PHP ran all over it with less cryptic syntax, and all the web 2.0 "me too" morons are now hacking away in Ruby and Python.But really, PERL's demise was PHP.
Especially since the CLI version of PHP, turning him into a true general purpose language.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290</id>
	<title>This has taken too long</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260132660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is it just my memory, or is this over five years on one upgrade.
An upgrade with too many changes, apocapses, and major
changes in grammer and usage. I'm getting old, and don't
really want to relearn my languages just to stay put. So keep
on delaying perl 6, and i can safely use perl 5 for the rest of
my life.
<p>
---
</p><p>
<a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/blogs/Perl\%20Programming/feed.html" title="feeddistiller.com">Perl Programming</a> [feeddistiller.com] Feed <a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/" title="feeddistiller.com">Feed Distiller</a> [feeddistiller.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it just my memory , or is this over five years on one upgrade .
An upgrade with too many changes , apocapses , and major changes in grammer and usage .
I 'm getting old , and do n't really want to relearn my languages just to stay put .
So keep on delaying perl 6 , and i can safely use perl 5 for the rest of my life .
--- Perl Programming [ feeddistiller.com ] Feed Feed Distiller [ feeddistiller.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it just my memory, or is this over five years on one upgrade.
An upgrade with too many changes, apocapses, and major
changes in grammer and usage.
I'm getting old, and don't
really want to relearn my languages just to stay put.
So keep
on delaying perl 6, and i can safely use perl 5 for the rest of
my life.
---

Perl Programming [feeddistiller.com] Feed Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346676</id>
	<title>Re:PERL went the way of the dodo...</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1260099600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>PHP isn't necessarily cryptic but it's just as ugly as PERL.</htmltext>
<tokenext>PHP is n't necessarily cryptic but it 's just as ugly as PERL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PHP isn't necessarily cryptic but it's just as ugly as PERL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345452</id>
	<title>Re:This has taken too long</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260090540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More than that--- Perl 6 <a href="http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2000/07/perl6.html" title="perl.com">was announced</a> [perl.com] 9 1/2 years ago! Even O'Reilly's <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0596004990?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=abxxm-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=0596004990" title="amazon.com"> <i>Perl 6 Essentials</i> </a> [amazon.com] is now 6 1/2 years old, and some Perl 6 books are into 2nd editions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More than that--- Perl 6 was announced [ perl.com ] 9 1/2 years ago !
Even O'Reilly 's Perl 6 Essentials [ amazon.com ] is now 6 1/2 years old , and some Perl 6 books are into 2nd editions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More than that--- Perl 6 was announced [perl.com] 9 1/2 years ago!
Even O'Reilly's  Perl 6 Essentials  [amazon.com] is now 6 1/2 years old, and some Perl 6 books are into 2nd editions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347996</id>
	<title>Re:perl 5 versus ruby versus perl 6</title>
	<author>bcrowell</author>
	<datestamp>1260108960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Could you point me to some examples of libraries that you use in Perl but could not find in Ruby?</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Interesting question. Okay, here's the list of all the CPAN modules that I routinely install on a system I'm going to use:
CDDB\_get, Term::ReadLine, Term::ReadLine::Gnu, Term::ANSIColor, Term::ReadKey, Curses, Mail::Sort, Net::DNS, Net::DNS::Resolver, Mail::Address, Mail::RFC822::Address, Mail::Sendmail, Digest::SHA1, Data::Dumper, XML::Parser, XML::Simple, Data::Dumper, Time::HiRes, RTF::Tokenizer, RTF::TEXT::Converter, Clone, Term::ReadKey, Date::Calc, Digest::SHA1, Digest::Whirlpool, Tk
</p><p>
A quick, casual sampling in RAA and RubyForge shows that indeed, a lot of these are also available in ruby. It's a little hard to tell, however, how to really compare. Some problems with comparisons: (1) I think some modules, e.g., Clone, are probably not necessary in Ruby; (2) it would be time-consuming to go through and find out what functionality was equivalent to what in all these cases; (3) there's no quick and easy way to compare quality; and (4) if I'm writing software for other people to use on linux, it makes it much more convenient for them if it's widely packaged by various linux distributions. Just as a random example, at one time I wrote a perl app that depended on two CPAN modules called Audio::Data and Audio::Play. Turned out that was a big mistake. The quality of the code was very poor, the author stopped supporting them, and there were portability issues. So I could have pointed to those two modules and said, "Look, perl supports this!," but actually it would have been misleading.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Could you point me to some examples of libraries that you use in Perl but could not find in Ruby ?
Interesting question .
Okay , here 's the list of all the CPAN modules that I routinely install on a system I 'm going to use : CDDB \ _get , Term : : ReadLine , Term : : ReadLine : : Gnu , Term : : ANSIColor , Term : : ReadKey , Curses , Mail : : Sort , Net : : DNS , Net : : DNS : : Resolver , Mail : : Address , Mail : : RFC822 : : Address , Mail : : Sendmail , Digest : : SHA1 , Data : : Dumper , XML : : Parser , XML : : Simple , Data : : Dumper , Time : : HiRes , RTF : : Tokenizer , RTF : : TEXT : : Converter , Clone , Term : : ReadKey , Date : : Calc , Digest : : SHA1 , Digest : : Whirlpool , Tk A quick , casual sampling in RAA and RubyForge shows that indeed , a lot of these are also available in ruby .
It 's a little hard to tell , however , how to really compare .
Some problems with comparisons : ( 1 ) I think some modules , e.g. , Clone , are probably not necessary in Ruby ; ( 2 ) it would be time-consuming to go through and find out what functionality was equivalent to what in all these cases ; ( 3 ) there 's no quick and easy way to compare quality ; and ( 4 ) if I 'm writing software for other people to use on linux , it makes it much more convenient for them if it 's widely packaged by various linux distributions .
Just as a random example , at one time I wrote a perl app that depended on two CPAN modules called Audio : : Data and Audio : : Play .
Turned out that was a big mistake .
The quality of the code was very poor , the author stopped supporting them , and there were portability issues .
So I could have pointed to those two modules and said , " Look , perl supports this ! , " but actually it would have been misleading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could you point me to some examples of libraries that you use in Perl but could not find in Ruby?
Interesting question.
Okay, here's the list of all the CPAN modules that I routinely install on a system I'm going to use:
CDDB\_get, Term::ReadLine, Term::ReadLine::Gnu, Term::ANSIColor, Term::ReadKey, Curses, Mail::Sort, Net::DNS, Net::DNS::Resolver, Mail::Address, Mail::RFC822::Address, Mail::Sendmail, Digest::SHA1, Data::Dumper, XML::Parser, XML::Simple, Data::Dumper, Time::HiRes, RTF::Tokenizer, RTF::TEXT::Converter, Clone, Term::ReadKey, Date::Calc, Digest::SHA1, Digest::Whirlpool, Tk

A quick, casual sampling in RAA and RubyForge shows that indeed, a lot of these are also available in ruby.
It's a little hard to tell, however, how to really compare.
Some problems with comparisons: (1) I think some modules, e.g., Clone, are probably not necessary in Ruby; (2) it would be time-consuming to go through and find out what functionality was equivalent to what in all these cases; (3) there's no quick and easy way to compare quality; and (4) if I'm writing software for other people to use on linux, it makes it much more convenient for them if it's widely packaged by various linux distributions.
Just as a random example, at one time I wrote a perl app that depended on two CPAN modules called Audio::Data and Audio::Play.
Turned out that was a big mistake.
The quality of the code was very poor, the author stopped supporting them, and there were portability issues.
So I could have pointed to those two modules and said, "Look, perl supports this!," but actually it would have been misleading.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30362088</id>
	<title>Non-Obligatory plug</title>
	<author>sonamchauhan</author>
	<datestamp>1260211380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To test out Perl 6 in an IDE environment, try Padre.<br><a href="http://padre.perlide.org/download.html" title="perlide.org">http://padre.perlide.org/download.html</a> [perlide.org]</p><p>NOTE 1: Install the 'Padre Standalone Plus Six' package, not the 'Padre Standalone' package)</p><p>NOTE 2: If you install it on windows, ensure you have a few hundred MB to spare on c:\ -- the drive targeting for the Install MSI does not work properly yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To test out Perl 6 in an IDE environment , try Padre.http : //padre.perlide.org/download.html [ perlide.org ] NOTE 1 : Install the 'Padre Standalone Plus Six ' package , not the 'Padre Standalone ' package ) NOTE 2 : If you install it on windows , ensure you have a few hundred MB to spare on c : \ -- the drive targeting for the Install MSI does not work properly yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To test out Perl 6 in an IDE environment, try Padre.http://padre.perlide.org/download.html [perlide.org]NOTE 1: Install the 'Padre Standalone Plus Six' package, not the 'Padre Standalone' package)NOTE 2: If you install it on windows, ensure you have a few hundred MB to spare on c:\ -- the drive targeting for the Install MSI does not work properly yet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345172</id>
	<title>Word on the street...</title>
	<author>ghostis</author>
	<datestamp>1260131820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... is Duke Nukem Forever is being rewritten in Perl 6.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... is Duke Nukem Forever is being rewritten in Perl 6 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... is Duke Nukem Forever is being rewritten in Perl 6.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30348700</id>
	<title>Re:This has taken too long</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260115260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Makes me wonder if Perl 6 would have been finished already if they wrote it in Perl 5</htmltext>
<tokenext>Makes me wonder if Perl 6 would have been finished already if they wrote it in Perl 5</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Makes me wonder if Perl 6 would have been finished already if they wrote it in Perl 5</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345484</id>
	<title>perl 5 versus ruby versus perl 6</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260090720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do most of my coding in perl 5. Perl 5's implementation is rock-solid, and CPAN has an absolutely fantastic selection of useful modules for perl 5.</p><p> If I was going to change to something other than perl 5, I would need some motivation. The clearest motivation I can see is that OOP in perl 5 is ugly and bolted on.</p><p>  With that motivation, I have dabbled in ruby enough to write one nontrivial app. The thing is, perl 5 still beats the heck out of ruby in terms of implementation and libraries. As an example of this, in my ruby app I wanted to use some regex features that were not available in ruby 1.8, so I ended up using ruby 1.9. But ruby 1.9, and its regex engine, are relatively raw and buggy, and I ended up having serious problems that I had to work around. (Yes, I submitted a bug report. No, it hasn't been fixed yet.)</p><p>
AFAICT, the main advantage of perl 6 over perl 5 is the same as ruby's main advantage over perl 5: OOP is implemented in a nicer way. The thing is, the disadvantages are even more magnified, because it's so raw and incomplete.
</p><p>
My current reaction to the situation is to plan on continuing to code in perl 5 until, say, 2015, and then check back to see how much ruby and perl 6 have improved by then.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do most of my coding in perl 5 .
Perl 5 's implementation is rock-solid , and CPAN has an absolutely fantastic selection of useful modules for perl 5 .
If I was going to change to something other than perl 5 , I would need some motivation .
The clearest motivation I can see is that OOP in perl 5 is ugly and bolted on .
With that motivation , I have dabbled in ruby enough to write one nontrivial app .
The thing is , perl 5 still beats the heck out of ruby in terms of implementation and libraries .
As an example of this , in my ruby app I wanted to use some regex features that were not available in ruby 1.8 , so I ended up using ruby 1.9 .
But ruby 1.9 , and its regex engine , are relatively raw and buggy , and I ended up having serious problems that I had to work around .
( Yes , I submitted a bug report .
No , it has n't been fixed yet .
) AFAICT , the main advantage of perl 6 over perl 5 is the same as ruby 's main advantage over perl 5 : OOP is implemented in a nicer way .
The thing is , the disadvantages are even more magnified , because it 's so raw and incomplete .
My current reaction to the situation is to plan on continuing to code in perl 5 until , say , 2015 , and then check back to see how much ruby and perl 6 have improved by then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do most of my coding in perl 5.
Perl 5's implementation is rock-solid, and CPAN has an absolutely fantastic selection of useful modules for perl 5.
If I was going to change to something other than perl 5, I would need some motivation.
The clearest motivation I can see is that OOP in perl 5 is ugly and bolted on.
With that motivation, I have dabbled in ruby enough to write one nontrivial app.
The thing is, perl 5 still beats the heck out of ruby in terms of implementation and libraries.
As an example of this, in my ruby app I wanted to use some regex features that were not available in ruby 1.8, so I ended up using ruby 1.9.
But ruby 1.9, and its regex engine, are relatively raw and buggy, and I ended up having serious problems that I had to work around.
(Yes, I submitted a bug report.
No, it hasn't been fixed yet.
)
AFAICT, the main advantage of perl 6 over perl 5 is the same as ruby's main advantage over perl 5: OOP is implemented in a nicer way.
The thing is, the disadvantages are even more magnified, because it's so raw and incomplete.
My current reaction to the situation is to plan on continuing to code in perl 5 until, say, 2015, and then check back to see how much ruby and perl 6 have improved by then.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30348292</id>
	<title>Perl Advent calendars...</title>
	<author>MSittig</author>
	<datestamp>1260111360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A Perl Monks poster has collected the address of 5 different Perl(-related) advent calendars:</p><p><a href="http://www.perlmonks.org/?node\_id=810472" title="perlmonks.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.perlmonks.org/?node\_id=810472</a> [perlmonks.org]</p><p>As he says, a "great tradition".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A Perl Monks poster has collected the address of 5 different Perl ( -related ) advent calendars : http : //www.perlmonks.org/ ? node \ _id = 810472 [ perlmonks.org ] As he says , a " great tradition " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A Perl Monks poster has collected the address of 5 different Perl(-related) advent calendars:http://www.perlmonks.org/?node\_id=810472 [perlmonks.org]As he says, a "great tradition".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30358358</id>
	<title>Not yet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260183780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>call me when done andreshidalgofondado@hotmail.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>call me when done andreshidalgofondado @ hotmail.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>call me when done andreshidalgofondado@hotmail.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345242</id>
	<title>Coming of the (perl) Messiah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260132420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Waiting for Perl 6 seems a lot like waiting for the Messiah to arrive. And even when (if)  it happens there'll be some people saying "Nope. Not the right one... Keep looking...."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Waiting for Perl 6 seems a lot like waiting for the Messiah to arrive .
And even when ( if ) it happens there 'll be some people saying " Nope .
Not the right one... Keep looking.... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Waiting for Perl 6 seems a lot like waiting for the Messiah to arrive.
And even when (if)  it happens there'll be some people saying "Nope.
Not the right one... Keep looking...."</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30396852</id>
	<title>Partidge in a Parrot tree</title>
	<author>aevans</author>
	<datestamp>1260450780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The most obvious pun.  What's the state of the onion like these days Larry?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The most obvious pun .
What 's the state of the onion like these days Larry ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The most obvious pun.
What's the state of the onion like these days Larry?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30355302</id>
	<title>Re:This has taken too long</title>
	<author>eabrek</author>
	<datestamp>1260211320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What is apocapses?  I read that as apocalypses...</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is apocapses ?
I read that as apocalypses.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is apocapses?
I read that as apocalypses...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346506</id>
	<title>Re:perl 5 versus ruby versus perl 6</title>
	<author>wayland</author>
	<datestamp>1260098640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>To me, the things that keeps me coming back to Perl 6 is that it will have built-in grammars.&nbsp; That may just be because of the kind of apps I try to write, though.&nbsp; </tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>To me , the things that keeps me coming back to Perl 6 is that it will have built-in grammars.   That may just be because of the kind of apps I try to write , though.  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>To me, the things that keeps me coming back to Perl 6 is that it will have built-in grammars.  That may just be because of the kind of apps I try to write, though.  </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30400186</id>
	<title>Re:perl 5 versus ruby versus perl 6</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260536880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>easier to find? <a href="cpan.org" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">CPAN</a> [slashdot.org] is too difficult?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>easier to find ?
CPAN [ slashdot.org ] is too difficult ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>easier to find?
CPAN [slashdot.org] is too difficult?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345446</id>
	<title>Re:Coming of the (perl) Messiah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260090480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you compare the Perl6 timeline to the Haskell timeline, you'll see that things aren't really going all that slowly. Building a good implementation of a complex programming language takes time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you compare the Perl6 timeline to the Haskell timeline , you 'll see that things are n't really going all that slowly .
Building a good implementation of a complex programming language takes time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you compare the Perl6 timeline to the Haskell timeline, you'll see that things aren't really going all that slowly.
Building a good implementation of a complex programming language takes time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345242</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346014</id>
	<title>Re:PERL went the way of the dodo...</title>
	<author>MathiasRav</author>
	<datestamp>1260095580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is this Funny or Flamebait?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this Funny or Flamebait ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this Funny or Flamebait?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347590</id>
	<title>Re:perl 5 versus ruby versus perl 6</title>
	<author>edelbrp</author>
	<datestamp>1260106380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been a long time Perl 5 developer, and have been doing a lot of Ruby since RoR was in beta.  I haven't had a lot of issues with Ruby, to be honest.  Most of the important CPAN modules have been ported to RubyGems and most of the serious Ruby bugs have been fixed.</p><p>Some things which make Ruby great: It's a very nice OO language.  Rails is basically the standard web framework used (Perl 5 has many to choose from, so inheriting a Perl web project can be a pita).</p><p>Some things which make Ruby not so great: It's sooo slow to start and requires mod\_rails/fastCGI/Mongrel or some other special environment to be fast enough for production web-apps.  The community (sorry) has a lot of n00bs that make it difficult to find truly talented programmers.</p><p>BTW- I think it's a little cheap to compare Ruby with Perl 6.  Ruby reached 1.0 in 1996, and Perl 6 hasn't reached production yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been a long time Perl 5 developer , and have been doing a lot of Ruby since RoR was in beta .
I have n't had a lot of issues with Ruby , to be honest .
Most of the important CPAN modules have been ported to RubyGems and most of the serious Ruby bugs have been fixed.Some things which make Ruby great : It 's a very nice OO language .
Rails is basically the standard web framework used ( Perl 5 has many to choose from , so inheriting a Perl web project can be a pita ) .Some things which make Ruby not so great : It 's sooo slow to start and requires mod \ _rails/fastCGI/Mongrel or some other special environment to be fast enough for production web-apps .
The community ( sorry ) has a lot of n00bs that make it difficult to find truly talented programmers.BTW- I think it 's a little cheap to compare Ruby with Perl 6 .
Ruby reached 1.0 in 1996 , and Perl 6 has n't reached production yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been a long time Perl 5 developer, and have been doing a lot of Ruby since RoR was in beta.
I haven't had a lot of issues with Ruby, to be honest.
Most of the important CPAN modules have been ported to RubyGems and most of the serious Ruby bugs have been fixed.Some things which make Ruby great: It's a very nice OO language.
Rails is basically the standard web framework used (Perl 5 has many to choose from, so inheriting a Perl web project can be a pita).Some things which make Ruby not so great: It's sooo slow to start and requires mod\_rails/fastCGI/Mongrel or some other special environment to be fast enough for production web-apps.
The community (sorry) has a lot of n00bs that make it difficult to find truly talented programmers.BTW- I think it's a little cheap to compare Ruby with Perl 6.
Ruby reached 1.0 in 1996, and Perl 6 hasn't reached production yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345782</id>
	<title>the "by xmas" curse</title>
	<author>ysth</author>
	<datestamp>1260093480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>CERN recently invoked the curse too: http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2009/PR18.09E.html.</htmltext>
<tokenext>CERN recently invoked the curse too : http : //press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2009/PR18.09E.html .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CERN recently invoked the curse too: http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2009/PR18.09E.html.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345736</id>
	<title>Re:still relevant?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260093000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, Perl is still relevant to a number of software developers and systems administrators.</p><p>It is an ideal language for software developers who want to use metaprogramming techniques (code generation; domain specific languages), text processing or data conversion, or automation of software development process. Perl 6 will have a full grammar engine (for parsing - like having YACC/BISON built in) which will make text processing even easier than before. The use of a scripting language for these tasks leaves the source code more accessible than compiled languages, which is an advantage to software developers who can adapt the code more readily than a compiled project.</p><p>Whether Perl 6 will be used much for primary software development I don't know. My day job is C programming for embedded systems where Perl is not suitable. Desktop programming is more likely to be in C++ or C# where the standard libraries are huge and the software development ecosystem is more developed.</p><p>The primary audience for new Perl, in my opinion, is expert software developers who need a powerful/succinct language to implement solutions to problems in the manner they think. Perl 6 therefore supports just about every programming paradigm known to mankind. What makes Perl great for software gurus is what makes it an awful language for programming newbies.</p><p>I will be learning Perl 6, not because I will use it much, but because I will discover new ways to think about problems. Oh, and it'll be fun.</p><p>Jonathan Paton</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , Perl is still relevant to a number of software developers and systems administrators.It is an ideal language for software developers who want to use metaprogramming techniques ( code generation ; domain specific languages ) , text processing or data conversion , or automation of software development process .
Perl 6 will have a full grammar engine ( for parsing - like having YACC/BISON built in ) which will make text processing even easier than before .
The use of a scripting language for these tasks leaves the source code more accessible than compiled languages , which is an advantage to software developers who can adapt the code more readily than a compiled project.Whether Perl 6 will be used much for primary software development I do n't know .
My day job is C programming for embedded systems where Perl is not suitable .
Desktop programming is more likely to be in C + + or C # where the standard libraries are huge and the software development ecosystem is more developed.The primary audience for new Perl , in my opinion , is expert software developers who need a powerful/succinct language to implement solutions to problems in the manner they think .
Perl 6 therefore supports just about every programming paradigm known to mankind .
What makes Perl great for software gurus is what makes it an awful language for programming newbies.I will be learning Perl 6 , not because I will use it much , but because I will discover new ways to think about problems .
Oh , and it 'll be fun.Jonathan Paton</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, Perl is still relevant to a number of software developers and systems administrators.It is an ideal language for software developers who want to use metaprogramming techniques (code generation; domain specific languages), text processing or data conversion, or automation of software development process.
Perl 6 will have a full grammar engine (for parsing - like having YACC/BISON built in) which will make text processing even easier than before.
The use of a scripting language for these tasks leaves the source code more accessible than compiled languages, which is an advantage to software developers who can adapt the code more readily than a compiled project.Whether Perl 6 will be used much for primary software development I don't know.
My day job is C programming for embedded systems where Perl is not suitable.
Desktop programming is more likely to be in C++ or C# where the standard libraries are huge and the software development ecosystem is more developed.The primary audience for new Perl, in my opinion, is expert software developers who need a powerful/succinct language to implement solutions to problems in the manner they think.
Perl 6 therefore supports just about every programming paradigm known to mankind.
What makes Perl great for software gurus is what makes it an awful language for programming newbies.I will be learning Perl 6, not because I will use it much, but because I will discover new ways to think about problems.
Oh, and it'll be fun.Jonathan Paton</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345334</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349578</id>
	<title>Nock nock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260124260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>who's there?<br>
Perl 6</htmltext>
<tokenext>who 's there ?
Perl 6</tokentext>
<sentencetext>who's there?
Perl 6</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345548</id>
	<title>Still not APL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260091440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It looks like they are attempting to reinvent APL. (with the addition of regex operations).</p><p>I can imagine a single line of code will now require 10 to 100 lines of comments to describe the iterations and references going on.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It looks like they are attempting to reinvent APL .
( with the addition of regex operations ) .I can imagine a single line of code will now require 10 to 100 lines of comments to describe the iterations and references going on .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>It looks like they are attempting to reinvent APL.
(with the addition of regex operations).I can imagine a single line of code will now require 10 to 100 lines of comments to describe the iterations and references going on.
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346468</id>
	<title>Re:still relevant?</title>
	<author>jonadab</author>
	<datestamp>1260098460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; it seems like perl has slowly moved from an ubiquitous scripting<br>&gt; language to a fringe research project over the last few years<br><br>Perl is not an ubiquitous scripting language.<br><br>Perl is *the* ubiquitous scripting language.  That hasn't really changed.  There are a number of other scripting languages, some of them newer than Perl and being used more and more (notably, Ruby), and some of them older than Perl and being used less and less (notably sh), but what hasn't changed in the last fifteen years is that Perl is about as popular as the three next-most-popular ones combined.  (I'm assuming here that Java and VB and C are not counted as scripting languages.)<br><br>As far as "fringe research project", there are certainly a number of fringe research projects associated with Perl, but the same could be said of any other major programming language.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; it seems like perl has slowly moved from an ubiquitous scripting &gt; language to a fringe research project over the last few yearsPerl is not an ubiquitous scripting language.Perl is * the * ubiquitous scripting language .
That has n't really changed .
There are a number of other scripting languages , some of them newer than Perl and being used more and more ( notably , Ruby ) , and some of them older than Perl and being used less and less ( notably sh ) , but what has n't changed in the last fifteen years is that Perl is about as popular as the three next-most-popular ones combined .
( I 'm assuming here that Java and VB and C are not counted as scripting languages .
) As far as " fringe research project " , there are certainly a number of fringe research projects associated with Perl , but the same could be said of any other major programming language .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; it seems like perl has slowly moved from an ubiquitous scripting&gt; language to a fringe research project over the last few yearsPerl is not an ubiquitous scripting language.Perl is *the* ubiquitous scripting language.
That hasn't really changed.
There are a number of other scripting languages, some of them newer than Perl and being used more and more (notably, Ruby), and some of them older than Perl and being used less and less (notably sh), but what hasn't changed in the last fifteen years is that Perl is about as popular as the three next-most-popular ones combined.
(I'm assuming here that Java and VB and C are not counted as scripting languages.
)As far as "fringe research project", there are certainly a number of fringe research projects associated with Perl, but the same could be said of any other major programming language.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345334</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349730</id>
	<title>What is Perl 6 anyway?</title>
	<author>Godefricus</author>
	<datestamp>1260126180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still haven't figured it out yet, so let me take this chance.<br>Can someone help me clarify: am I right about this?</p><p>- Perl 6 is the successor to Perl 5, it will not exist as an implementation but as a specification. That specification is finished and definitive. It is owned by Larry Wall and small circle of his friends. They want everyone to implement interpreters for Perl 6;<br>- An official test suite for Perl 6 exists and it is complete. Anything passing this test suite IS Perl 6. The test suite is stored with Pugs, an "early" attempt at a Perl 6-implementation that is no longer developed;<br>- Perl 6 will not be interpreted directly by any one interpreter, like earlier versions of Perl, but it will be interpreted by a VM (Parrot) that 'plays' bytecode fed to it by several language-specific bytecode-compilers that act as plug-ins to Parrot. Parrot is owned by a bunch of friends of Larry Wall;<br>- Several groups of people started implementing Perl 6. Pugs was one of the earliest. It is now unfinished and dead. Rakudo is the implementation-in-progress that gets the most attention now, because it is closest to being finished. It will be released for production in April 2006, which will mean "Perl 6.0 is out and it works". As with Pugs and any other bytecode-compiler for Perl 6 though, you will need Parrot to run it. Rakudo, Pugs et cetera are owned by their respective developers.</p><p>Forgive me the long description of what I now think is Perl 6, but the various websites I try to find answers on aren't making it a lot more transparent.</p><p>Could someone comment on this if I misunderstood something?</p><p>And what about these views. Are people right who say:<br>- Perl 6 is not finished by any means, but the people working on it don't seem to care as much, and instead go on to question the validity of the concept "finished".<br>- Meanwhile, Perl 5, the ruling king of scripting languages has become fringe, and Perl 6 is largely viewed as a toy for philosophically-minded scholars.<br>?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still have n't figured it out yet , so let me take this chance.Can someone help me clarify : am I right about this ? - Perl 6 is the successor to Perl 5 , it will not exist as an implementation but as a specification .
That specification is finished and definitive .
It is owned by Larry Wall and small circle of his friends .
They want everyone to implement interpreters for Perl 6 ; - An official test suite for Perl 6 exists and it is complete .
Anything passing this test suite IS Perl 6 .
The test suite is stored with Pugs , an " early " attempt at a Perl 6-implementation that is no longer developed ; - Perl 6 will not be interpreted directly by any one interpreter , like earlier versions of Perl , but it will be interpreted by a VM ( Parrot ) that 'plays ' bytecode fed to it by several language-specific bytecode-compilers that act as plug-ins to Parrot .
Parrot is owned by a bunch of friends of Larry Wall ; - Several groups of people started implementing Perl 6 .
Pugs was one of the earliest .
It is now unfinished and dead .
Rakudo is the implementation-in-progress that gets the most attention now , because it is closest to being finished .
It will be released for production in April 2006 , which will mean " Perl 6.0 is out and it works " .
As with Pugs and any other bytecode-compiler for Perl 6 though , you will need Parrot to run it .
Rakudo , Pugs et cetera are owned by their respective developers.Forgive me the long description of what I now think is Perl 6 , but the various websites I try to find answers on are n't making it a lot more transparent.Could someone comment on this if I misunderstood something ? And what about these views .
Are people right who say : - Perl 6 is not finished by any means , but the people working on it do n't seem to care as much , and instead go on to question the validity of the concept " finished " .- Meanwhile , Perl 5 , the ruling king of scripting languages has become fringe , and Perl 6 is largely viewed as a toy for philosophically-minded scholars .
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still haven't figured it out yet, so let me take this chance.Can someone help me clarify: am I right about this?- Perl 6 is the successor to Perl 5, it will not exist as an implementation but as a specification.
That specification is finished and definitive.
It is owned by Larry Wall and small circle of his friends.
They want everyone to implement interpreters for Perl 6;- An official test suite for Perl 6 exists and it is complete.
Anything passing this test suite IS Perl 6.
The test suite is stored with Pugs, an "early" attempt at a Perl 6-implementation that is no longer developed;- Perl 6 will not be interpreted directly by any one interpreter, like earlier versions of Perl, but it will be interpreted by a VM (Parrot) that 'plays' bytecode fed to it by several language-specific bytecode-compilers that act as plug-ins to Parrot.
Parrot is owned by a bunch of friends of Larry Wall;- Several groups of people started implementing Perl 6.
Pugs was one of the earliest.
It is now unfinished and dead.
Rakudo is the implementation-in-progress that gets the most attention now, because it is closest to being finished.
It will be released for production in April 2006, which will mean "Perl 6.0 is out and it works".
As with Pugs and any other bytecode-compiler for Perl 6 though, you will need Parrot to run it.
Rakudo, Pugs et cetera are owned by their respective developers.Forgive me the long description of what I now think is Perl 6, but the various websites I try to find answers on aren't making it a lot more transparent.Could someone comment on this if I misunderstood something?And what about these views.
Are people right who say:- Perl 6 is not finished by any means, but the people working on it don't seem to care as much, and instead go on to question the validity of the concept "finished".- Meanwhile, Perl 5, the ruling king of scripting languages has become fringe, and Perl 6 is largely viewed as a toy for philosophically-minded scholars.
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345496</id>
	<title>Re:This has taken too long</title>
	<author>spottedkangaroo</author>
	<datestamp>1260090900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not at all.  Perl6 is not an upgrade of Perl5, which is still being actively developed.  Perl6 is a brand new language in the same family.  Perl 5.10 is more like what people expect from a language upgrade.  It has so many new features it's very much like a new version of the language (and it is).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not at all .
Perl6 is not an upgrade of Perl5 , which is still being actively developed .
Perl6 is a brand new language in the same family .
Perl 5.10 is more like what people expect from a language upgrade .
It has so many new features it 's very much like a new version of the language ( and it is ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not at all.
Perl6 is not an upgrade of Perl5, which is still being actively developed.
Perl6 is a brand new language in the same family.
Perl 5.10 is more like what people expect from a language upgrade.
It has so many new features it's very much like a new version of the language (and it is).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30363050</id>
	<title>Re:What is Perl 6 anyway?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260267180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Perl 6 is the successor to Perl 5, it will not exist as an implementation but as a specification. That specification is finished and definitive. It is owned by Larry Wall and small circle of his friends. They want everyone to implement interpreters for Perl 6;"</p><p>Incorrect. Perl 6 is a specification rather than a particular implementation (one of the major problems with Perl 5 is that the only spec is 'what the Perl 5 interpreter accepts', which is not particularly helpful if you want to produce another implementation, or a variety of language-aware tools), but the specification is currently unfinished. The spec is also very open - contributors are always welcome. There's discussion of the development of the spec on the perl6-language list and in the #perl6 IRC channel on Freenode. Commit bits for the SVN repo where the spec lives are easy to get hold of. In practice, most of the changes are made by a core group, but that's because they're the people who've made the effort to understand it and think about it, and they're often working on the results of discussion with various others. Larry Wall tends to get the final say, but there are good reasons for that (he's usually right, and he's the one who came up with the whole Perl vision in the first place).</p><p>"An official test suite for Perl 6 exists and it is complete. Anything passing this test suite IS Perl 6. The test suite is stored with Pugs, an "early" attempt at a Perl 6-implementation that is no longer developed;"</p><p>Like the spec, the test suite is incomplete, but otherwise that's essentially correct.</p><p>"Perl 6 will not be interpreted directly by any one interpreter, like earlier versions of Perl, but it will be interpreted by a VM (Parrot) that 'plays' bytecode fed to it by several language-specific bytecode-compilers that act as plug-ins to Parrot. Parrot is owned by a bunch of friends of Larry Wall;"</p><p>Partially correct. Rakudo Perl is a Parrot-based compiler to run Perl 6 on the Parrot VM. The other Perl 6 implementations do not use Parrot at all. Parrot was envisaged as part of the original plan for Perl 6, and it seems likely that Rakudo+Parrot will be the 'norm' at least at the start, but we're quite excited by the possibilities of running Perl 6 on the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET DLR, or for the implementation which targets SMOP. Parrot's ownership is with the Perl Foundation, I believe.</p><p>"Several groups of people started implementing Perl 6. Pugs was one of the earliest. It is now unfinished and dead. Rakudo is the implementation-in-progress that gets the most attention now, because it is closest to being finished. It will be released for production in April 2006, which will mean "Perl 6.0 is out and it works". As with Pugs and any other bytecode-compiler for Perl 6 though, you will need Parrot to run it. Rakudo, Pugs et cetera are owned by their respective developers."</p><p>Pugs was invaluable in helping the Perl 6 spec to develop, as ideas were tried and refined in an environment that let code actually be written. It stalled and has faded into the background over the last few years, which has let Rakudo take centre stage. Rakudo is the most advanced implementation, and Rakudo *, scheduled for April 2010, will be a usable release people can use for a variety of tasks. It will not, however, be complete - there are parts of the Perl 6 spec that we know won't make it into *, and there are other parts of the spec which haven't been written yet - particularly gaping areas currently include the standard library, concurrency (except the implicit concurrency of hyperoperators) and foreign function calls.</p><p>I hope that gives you a better idea of what's going on.</p><p>"Perl 6 is not finished by any means, but the people working on it don't seem to care as much, and instead go on to question the validity of the concept "finished"."</p><p>You say that in a disdainful manner, but there is no such thing as 'finished' for a programming language. Is C++ finished? It's out there, it's widely used, but C++0x is still under development and widel</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Perl 6 is the successor to Perl 5 , it will not exist as an implementation but as a specification .
That specification is finished and definitive .
It is owned by Larry Wall and small circle of his friends .
They want everyone to implement interpreters for Perl 6 ; " Incorrect .
Perl 6 is a specification rather than a particular implementation ( one of the major problems with Perl 5 is that the only spec is 'what the Perl 5 interpreter accepts ' , which is not particularly helpful if you want to produce another implementation , or a variety of language-aware tools ) , but the specification is currently unfinished .
The spec is also very open - contributors are always welcome .
There 's discussion of the development of the spec on the perl6-language list and in the # perl6 IRC channel on Freenode .
Commit bits for the SVN repo where the spec lives are easy to get hold of .
In practice , most of the changes are made by a core group , but that 's because they 're the people who 've made the effort to understand it and think about it , and they 're often working on the results of discussion with various others .
Larry Wall tends to get the final say , but there are good reasons for that ( he 's usually right , and he 's the one who came up with the whole Perl vision in the first place ) .
" An official test suite for Perl 6 exists and it is complete .
Anything passing this test suite IS Perl 6 .
The test suite is stored with Pugs , an " early " attempt at a Perl 6-implementation that is no longer developed ; " Like the spec , the test suite is incomplete , but otherwise that 's essentially correct .
" Perl 6 will not be interpreted directly by any one interpreter , like earlier versions of Perl , but it will be interpreted by a VM ( Parrot ) that 'plays ' bytecode fed to it by several language-specific bytecode-compilers that act as plug-ins to Parrot .
Parrot is owned by a bunch of friends of Larry Wall ; " Partially correct .
Rakudo Perl is a Parrot-based compiler to run Perl 6 on the Parrot VM .
The other Perl 6 implementations do not use Parrot at all .
Parrot was envisaged as part of the original plan for Perl 6 , and it seems likely that Rakudo + Parrot will be the 'norm ' at least at the start , but we 're quite excited by the possibilities of running Perl 6 on the .NET DLR , or for the implementation which targets SMOP .
Parrot 's ownership is with the Perl Foundation , I believe .
" Several groups of people started implementing Perl 6 .
Pugs was one of the earliest .
It is now unfinished and dead .
Rakudo is the implementation-in-progress that gets the most attention now , because it is closest to being finished .
It will be released for production in April 2006 , which will mean " Perl 6.0 is out and it works " .
As with Pugs and any other bytecode-compiler for Perl 6 though , you will need Parrot to run it .
Rakudo , Pugs et cetera are owned by their respective developers .
" Pugs was invaluable in helping the Perl 6 spec to develop , as ideas were tried and refined in an environment that let code actually be written .
It stalled and has faded into the background over the last few years , which has let Rakudo take centre stage .
Rakudo is the most advanced implementation , and Rakudo * , scheduled for April 2010 , will be a usable release people can use for a variety of tasks .
It will not , however , be complete - there are parts of the Perl 6 spec that we know wo n't make it into * , and there are other parts of the spec which have n't been written yet - particularly gaping areas currently include the standard library , concurrency ( except the implicit concurrency of hyperoperators ) and foreign function calls.I hope that gives you a better idea of what 's going on .
" Perl 6 is not finished by any means , but the people working on it do n't seem to care as much , and instead go on to question the validity of the concept " finished " .
" You say that in a disdainful manner , but there is no such thing as 'finished ' for a programming language .
Is C + + finished ?
It 's out there , it 's widely used , but C + + 0x is still under development and widel</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Perl 6 is the successor to Perl 5, it will not exist as an implementation but as a specification.
That specification is finished and definitive.
It is owned by Larry Wall and small circle of his friends.
They want everyone to implement interpreters for Perl 6;"Incorrect.
Perl 6 is a specification rather than a particular implementation (one of the major problems with Perl 5 is that the only spec is 'what the Perl 5 interpreter accepts', which is not particularly helpful if you want to produce another implementation, or a variety of language-aware tools), but the specification is currently unfinished.
The spec is also very open - contributors are always welcome.
There's discussion of the development of the spec on the perl6-language list and in the #perl6 IRC channel on Freenode.
Commit bits for the SVN repo where the spec lives are easy to get hold of.
In practice, most of the changes are made by a core group, but that's because they're the people who've made the effort to understand it and think about it, and they're often working on the results of discussion with various others.
Larry Wall tends to get the final say, but there are good reasons for that (he's usually right, and he's the one who came up with the whole Perl vision in the first place).
"An official test suite for Perl 6 exists and it is complete.
Anything passing this test suite IS Perl 6.
The test suite is stored with Pugs, an "early" attempt at a Perl 6-implementation that is no longer developed;"Like the spec, the test suite is incomplete, but otherwise that's essentially correct.
"Perl 6 will not be interpreted directly by any one interpreter, like earlier versions of Perl, but it will be interpreted by a VM (Parrot) that 'plays' bytecode fed to it by several language-specific bytecode-compilers that act as plug-ins to Parrot.
Parrot is owned by a bunch of friends of Larry Wall;"Partially correct.
Rakudo Perl is a Parrot-based compiler to run Perl 6 on the Parrot VM.
The other Perl 6 implementations do not use Parrot at all.
Parrot was envisaged as part of the original plan for Perl 6, and it seems likely that Rakudo+Parrot will be the 'norm' at least at the start, but we're quite excited by the possibilities of running Perl 6 on the .NET DLR, or for the implementation which targets SMOP.
Parrot's ownership is with the Perl Foundation, I believe.
"Several groups of people started implementing Perl 6.
Pugs was one of the earliest.
It is now unfinished and dead.
Rakudo is the implementation-in-progress that gets the most attention now, because it is closest to being finished.
It will be released for production in April 2006, which will mean "Perl 6.0 is out and it works".
As with Pugs and any other bytecode-compiler for Perl 6 though, you will need Parrot to run it.
Rakudo, Pugs et cetera are owned by their respective developers.
"Pugs was invaluable in helping the Perl 6 spec to develop, as ideas were tried and refined in an environment that let code actually be written.
It stalled and has faded into the background over the last few years, which has let Rakudo take centre stage.
Rakudo is the most advanced implementation, and Rakudo *, scheduled for April 2010, will be a usable release people can use for a variety of tasks.
It will not, however, be complete - there are parts of the Perl 6 spec that we know won't make it into *, and there are other parts of the spec which haven't been written yet - particularly gaping areas currently include the standard library, concurrency (except the implicit concurrency of hyperoperators) and foreign function calls.I hope that gives you a better idea of what's going on.
"Perl 6 is not finished by any means, but the people working on it don't seem to care as much, and instead go on to question the validity of the concept "finished".
"You say that in a disdainful manner, but there is no such thing as 'finished' for a programming language.
Is C++ finished?
It's out there, it's widely used, but C++0x is still under development and widel</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345832</id>
	<title>Perl6 Advent Calendar on PHP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260093840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why couldn't they use a Perl blog framework like Movable Type instead of Wordpress...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why could n't they use a Perl blog framework like Movable Type instead of Wordpress.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why couldn't they use a Perl blog framework like Movable Type instead of Wordpress...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30352208</id>
	<title>Perl...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260197820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because I hate the ASCII characters 65 through 90 and 97 through 122.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because I hate the ASCII characters 65 through 90 and 97 through 122 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because I hate the ASCII characters 65 through 90 and 97 through 122.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345480</id>
	<title>Re:This has taken too long</title>
	<author>RDW</author>
	<datestamp>1260090720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perl 6 is a new language, not just an upgrade. Perl 5 has not been neglected, and continues to receive updates and new features (some of them originally developed for Perl 6). The plan is to continue Perl 5 support and development indefinitely, irrespective of the status of Perl 6. And of course Perl 5 has its own advent calendar, which this year focuses on interesting stuff you can do with various CPAN modules:</p><p><a href="http://www.perladvent.org/2009/" title="perladvent.org">http://www.perladvent.org/2009/</a> [perladvent.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perl 6 is a new language , not just an upgrade .
Perl 5 has not been neglected , and continues to receive updates and new features ( some of them originally developed for Perl 6 ) .
The plan is to continue Perl 5 support and development indefinitely , irrespective of the status of Perl 6 .
And of course Perl 5 has its own advent calendar , which this year focuses on interesting stuff you can do with various CPAN modules : http : //www.perladvent.org/2009/ [ perladvent.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perl 6 is a new language, not just an upgrade.
Perl 5 has not been neglected, and continues to receive updates and new features (some of them originally developed for Perl 6).
The plan is to continue Perl 5 support and development indefinitely, irrespective of the status of Perl 6.
And of course Perl 5 has its own advent calendar, which this year focuses on interesting stuff you can do with various CPAN modules:http://www.perladvent.org/2009/ [perladvent.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349628</id>
	<title>Re:perl 5 versus ruby versus perl 6</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260124920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been working with Perl 5 as my primary development language for about 10 years, and while I love what Perl does well, what Perl doesn't do well (particularly objects and error handling) SUCKS.</p><p>I've recently had the very surprising pleasure of doing a new project in PHP. Now, if you haven't used PHP lately, you would probably be moaning to some degree like I did, but you know what? PHP 5.3 has grown into a real language. Yes, there is still some library inconsistency and cruft, but it has most of the features one expects from a modern language, and PHP compares very favorably with Perl in terms available libraries and functions.</p><p>I'd never thought I'd see the day that I enjoyed PHP, but it's really grown into a nice language. No, it still doesn't have the syntactical shortcuts that Perl has (e.g., regular expressions as fundamental operators), but I don't care. It's been such a pleasure having real objects and relatively real exceptions that I'm actually starting to hate using Perl and its ancient crap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been working with Perl 5 as my primary development language for about 10 years , and while I love what Perl does well , what Perl does n't do well ( particularly objects and error handling ) SUCKS.I 've recently had the very surprising pleasure of doing a new project in PHP .
Now , if you have n't used PHP lately , you would probably be moaning to some degree like I did , but you know what ?
PHP 5.3 has grown into a real language .
Yes , there is still some library inconsistency and cruft , but it has most of the features one expects from a modern language , and PHP compares very favorably with Perl in terms available libraries and functions.I 'd never thought I 'd see the day that I enjoyed PHP , but it 's really grown into a nice language .
No , it still does n't have the syntactical shortcuts that Perl has ( e.g. , regular expressions as fundamental operators ) , but I do n't care .
It 's been such a pleasure having real objects and relatively real exceptions that I 'm actually starting to hate using Perl and its ancient crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been working with Perl 5 as my primary development language for about 10 years, and while I love what Perl does well, what Perl doesn't do well (particularly objects and error handling) SUCKS.I've recently had the very surprising pleasure of doing a new project in PHP.
Now, if you haven't used PHP lately, you would probably be moaning to some degree like I did, but you know what?
PHP 5.3 has grown into a real language.
Yes, there is still some library inconsistency and cruft, but it has most of the features one expects from a modern language, and PHP compares very favorably with Perl in terms available libraries and functions.I'd never thought I'd see the day that I enjoyed PHP, but it's really grown into a nice language.
No, it still doesn't have the syntactical shortcuts that Perl has (e.g., regular expressions as fundamental operators), but I don't care.
It's been such a pleasure having real objects and relatively real exceptions that I'm actually starting to hate using Perl and its ancient crap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349964</id>
	<title>Rakudo Star not a production release</title>
	<author>zmotula</author>
	<datestamp>1260128940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rakudo Star is not a production release. In the linked blog pmichaud says he would like to stay away from words like "finished" or "stable" and calls Rakudo Star a "useful" and "usable" release. The "Star" itself means literal *, or "whatever", to get away from commiting versioning or release engineering terms. The release will be simply something you can hack on without major inconveniences.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rakudo Star is not a production release .
In the linked blog pmichaud says he would like to stay away from words like " finished " or " stable " and calls Rakudo Star a " useful " and " usable " release .
The " Star " itself means literal * , or " whatever " , to get away from commiting versioning or release engineering terms .
The release will be simply something you can hack on without major inconveniences .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rakudo Star is not a production release.
In the linked blog pmichaud says he would like to stay away from words like "finished" or "stable" and calls Rakudo Star a "useful" and "usable" release.
The "Star" itself means literal *, or "whatever", to get away from commiting versioning or release engineering terms.
The release will be simply something you can hack on without major inconveniences.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30348022</id>
	<title>Re:Word on the street...</title>
	<author>wayland</author>
	<datestamp>1260109320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>No, I think they're trying to integrate DNF with E17.&nbsp; </tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , I think they 're trying to integrate DNF with E17.  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, I think they're trying to integrate DNF with E17.  </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345748</id>
	<title>Re:PERL went the way of the dodo...</title>
	<author>pierreact</author>
	<datestamp>1260093120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"morons are now hacking away in Ruby and Python"...
Oh man.
Ruby is great for this kind of stuff, so is, as I heard (ruby user here) python.
I used to use perl for those tasks but I found it too messy when writting large programs and ridiculous when it comes to OOP (colors and tastes...).
ruby fits my needs, the code is clear and short, it's very maintainable...
All I need it here<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)

I'm happy with it and oh... I used it to automate a 30 nodes cluster all the way.
Moron, maybe but the shit works very well in the long run.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)
have a sweet day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" morons are now hacking away in Ruby and Python " .. . Oh man .
Ruby is great for this kind of stuff , so is , as I heard ( ruby user here ) python .
I used to use perl for those tasks but I found it too messy when writting large programs and ridiculous when it comes to OOP ( colors and tastes... ) .
ruby fits my needs , the code is clear and short , it 's very maintainable.. . All I need it here : ) I 'm happy with it and oh... I used it to automate a 30 nodes cluster all the way .
Moron , maybe but the shit works very well in the long run .
; ) have a sweet day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"morons are now hacking away in Ruby and Python"...
Oh man.
Ruby is great for this kind of stuff, so is, as I heard (ruby user here) python.
I used to use perl for those tasks but I found it too messy when writting large programs and ridiculous when it comes to OOP (colors and tastes...).
ruby fits my needs, the code is clear and short, it's very maintainable...
All I need it here :)

I'm happy with it and oh... I used it to automate a 30 nodes cluster all the way.
Moron, maybe but the shit works very well in the long run.
;)
have a sweet day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346796</id>
	<title>Re:PERL went the way of the dodo...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260100680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...it's too late for PERL. The system and kernel engineers chose to stick with C, PHP ran all over it with less cryptic syntax, and all the web 2.0 "me too" morons are now hacking away in Ruby and Python.</p><p>But really, PERL's demise was PHP. Especially since the CLI version of PHP, turning him into a true general purpose language.</p></div><p>Dude, you lost me at PHP.<br>
Perl <b>IS</b> the most widely spread scripting system on a Unix host, after Shell.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...it 's too late for PERL .
The system and kernel engineers chose to stick with C , PHP ran all over it with less cryptic syntax , and all the web 2.0 " me too " morons are now hacking away in Ruby and Python.But really , PERL 's demise was PHP .
Especially since the CLI version of PHP , turning him into a true general purpose language.Dude , you lost me at PHP .
Perl IS the most widely spread scripting system on a Unix host , after Shell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...it's too late for PERL.
The system and kernel engineers chose to stick with C, PHP ran all over it with less cryptic syntax, and all the web 2.0 "me too" morons are now hacking away in Ruby and Python.But really, PERL's demise was PHP.
Especially since the CLI version of PHP, turning him into a true general purpose language.Dude, you lost me at PHP.
Perl IS the most widely spread scripting system on a Unix host, after Shell.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347452</id>
	<title>Relevance vs Effectiveness</title>
	<author>weston</author>
	<datestamp>1260105420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>the pascal/modula-2/oberon phenomenon</i></p><p>Funny, that's what a lot of people who liked modula-2 and oberon have said about the recently released Go.</p><p><i>do perl afficionados think that this new version will enjoy the success that its predecessors have had?</i></p><p>Do you mean popularity or success?</p><p>Popularity is <em>related</em> to its success, since a bigger community can provide a significant boost to a language, both in terms of library development and in terms of perceived viability as part of a commercial product.</p><p>But widespread use isn't really the same thing. If it's an effective and pleasant tool for those who choose it, then it's successful.</p><p>(And sometimes, a small, experienced, and smart community puts out better libraries and tools than a large one. Consider PHP.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the pascal/modula-2/oberon phenomenonFunny , that 's what a lot of people who liked modula-2 and oberon have said about the recently released Go.do perl afficionados think that this new version will enjoy the success that its predecessors have had ? Do you mean popularity or success ? Popularity is related to its success , since a bigger community can provide a significant boost to a language , both in terms of library development and in terms of perceived viability as part of a commercial product.But widespread use is n't really the same thing .
If it 's an effective and pleasant tool for those who choose it , then it 's successful .
( And sometimes , a small , experienced , and smart community puts out better libraries and tools than a large one .
Consider PHP .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the pascal/modula-2/oberon phenomenonFunny, that's what a lot of people who liked modula-2 and oberon have said about the recently released Go.do perl afficionados think that this new version will enjoy the success that its predecessors have had?Do you mean popularity or success?Popularity is related to its success, since a bigger community can provide a significant boost to a language, both in terms of library development and in terms of perceived viability as part of a commercial product.But widespread use isn't really the same thing.
If it's an effective and pleasant tool for those who choose it, then it's successful.
(And sometimes, a small, experienced, and smart community puts out better libraries and tools than a large one.
Consider PHP.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345334</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345544</id>
	<title>Re:PERL went the way of the dodo...</title>
	<author>outZider</author>
	<datestamp>1260091440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, PHP is still an archaic, over keyworded language. Surefire way to find out if a company doesn't know what they're doing: they use PHP at the command line.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , PHP is still an archaic , over keyworded language .
Surefire way to find out if a company does n't know what they 're doing : they use PHP at the command line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, PHP is still an archaic, over keyworded language.
Surefire way to find out if a company doesn't know what they're doing: they use PHP at the command line.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347240</id>
	<title>It makes the easy stuff easy ...</title>
	<author>parisjackson</author>
	<datestamp>1260103920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>and the wait for Perl 6 take forever</htmltext>
<tokenext>and the wait for Perl 6 take forever</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and the wait for Perl 6 take forever</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345334</id>
	<title>still relevant?</title>
	<author>spongman</author>
	<datestamp>1260132960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>from an outsider's view (I have NO perl experience, and i intend to die like that if at all possible) it seems like perl has slowly moved from an ubiquitous scripting language to a fringe research project over the last few years. it reminds me somewhat of the pascal/modula-2/oberon phenomenon. do perl afficionados think that this new version will enjoy the success that its predecessors have had?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>from an outsider 's view ( I have NO perl experience , and i intend to die like that if at all possible ) it seems like perl has slowly moved from an ubiquitous scripting language to a fringe research project over the last few years .
it reminds me somewhat of the pascal/modula-2/oberon phenomenon .
do perl afficionados think that this new version will enjoy the success that its predecessors have had ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from an outsider's view (I have NO perl experience, and i intend to die like that if at all possible) it seems like perl has slowly moved from an ubiquitous scripting language to a fringe research project over the last few years.
it reminds me somewhat of the pascal/modula-2/oberon phenomenon.
do perl afficionados think that this new version will enjoy the success that its predecessors have had?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30359424</id>
	<title>Re:This has taken too long</title>
	<author>ajs</author>
	<datestamp>1260189480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is it just my memory, or is this over five years on one upgrade.</p></div><p>Perl 6 is not an upgrade to Perl 5.</p><p>This is something that many folks misunderstand, and frankly, it's a failure of the Perl development team to correctly communicate (an open source project with poor PR skills... shocking). Perl 6 isn't a new language either, though you'll find many who will say that it is (even within the project, where it's a sort of shorthand way of interrupting the long conversation that ensues if you don't call it a new language).</p><p>What Perl 6 is is the logical progression of Perl into the realm of modern, highly dynamic language. That means it's drawing on the concepts that come from many popular (and some not so popular) modern languages and blending them in a way that has never been done before. False starts, long implementation paths and re-designs triggered by new insights are par for the course.</p><p>But I want to take exception to the idea that "this has taken too long." How long is too long? If Perl 6 were released 2 days after you died of old age, would that be too long? What about 10 years from now? 5? 2? What's it mean to take too long? There were an abundance of languages that were popular when Perl 6 work started and there will be an abundance of them when Perl 6 lands. What Perl has lost is momentum. Perl 6 will not have the easy conversion of a massive Perl user base to start with, but then Perl didn't have that when it started.</p><p>Perl was a success because it solved a problem. It gave developers a tool for writing simple programs quickly without sacrificing features that they depended on in lower level languages such as binary data, arbitrary size strings and system call access, the three of which did not, as far as I can recall, exist in any other high level language at the time, outside of Lisp and unlike Lisp, Perl felt comfortable and familiar to the average Unix user at the time.</p><p>What will Perl 6 have going for it?</p><p>It will be the first language to give you the rich dynamic OO features of Ruby and Smalltalk, blended with the self-hosted language introspection of Common Lisp and the still-familiar feel of Unix/Linux systems all on a portable and language-neutral VM. Will that be a draw to the same sorts of users that cared strongly about Perl 5? Some yes and some no, but there will be a brand new segment of the programming community that will care strongly about Perl 6 features.</p><p>That's really all that matters, not how long it takes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it just my memory , or is this over five years on one upgrade.Perl 6 is not an upgrade to Perl 5.This is something that many folks misunderstand , and frankly , it 's a failure of the Perl development team to correctly communicate ( an open source project with poor PR skills... shocking ) . Perl 6 is n't a new language either , though you 'll find many who will say that it is ( even within the project , where it 's a sort of shorthand way of interrupting the long conversation that ensues if you do n't call it a new language ) .What Perl 6 is is the logical progression of Perl into the realm of modern , highly dynamic language .
That means it 's drawing on the concepts that come from many popular ( and some not so popular ) modern languages and blending them in a way that has never been done before .
False starts , long implementation paths and re-designs triggered by new insights are par for the course.But I want to take exception to the idea that " this has taken too long .
" How long is too long ?
If Perl 6 were released 2 days after you died of old age , would that be too long ?
What about 10 years from now ?
5 ? 2 ?
What 's it mean to take too long ?
There were an abundance of languages that were popular when Perl 6 work started and there will be an abundance of them when Perl 6 lands .
What Perl has lost is momentum .
Perl 6 will not have the easy conversion of a massive Perl user base to start with , but then Perl did n't have that when it started.Perl was a success because it solved a problem .
It gave developers a tool for writing simple programs quickly without sacrificing features that they depended on in lower level languages such as binary data , arbitrary size strings and system call access , the three of which did not , as far as I can recall , exist in any other high level language at the time , outside of Lisp and unlike Lisp , Perl felt comfortable and familiar to the average Unix user at the time.What will Perl 6 have going for it ? It will be the first language to give you the rich dynamic OO features of Ruby and Smalltalk , blended with the self-hosted language introspection of Common Lisp and the still-familiar feel of Unix/Linux systems all on a portable and language-neutral VM .
Will that be a draw to the same sorts of users that cared strongly about Perl 5 ?
Some yes and some no , but there will be a brand new segment of the programming community that will care strongly about Perl 6 features.That 's really all that matters , not how long it takes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it just my memory, or is this over five years on one upgrade.Perl 6 is not an upgrade to Perl 5.This is something that many folks misunderstand, and frankly, it's a failure of the Perl development team to correctly communicate (an open source project with poor PR skills... shocking). Perl 6 isn't a new language either, though you'll find many who will say that it is (even within the project, where it's a sort of shorthand way of interrupting the long conversation that ensues if you don't call it a new language).What Perl 6 is is the logical progression of Perl into the realm of modern, highly dynamic language.
That means it's drawing on the concepts that come from many popular (and some not so popular) modern languages and blending them in a way that has never been done before.
False starts, long implementation paths and re-designs triggered by new insights are par for the course.But I want to take exception to the idea that "this has taken too long.
" How long is too long?
If Perl 6 were released 2 days after you died of old age, would that be too long?
What about 10 years from now?
5? 2?
What's it mean to take too long?
There were an abundance of languages that were popular when Perl 6 work started and there will be an abundance of them when Perl 6 lands.
What Perl has lost is momentum.
Perl 6 will not have the easy conversion of a massive Perl user base to start with, but then Perl didn't have that when it started.Perl was a success because it solved a problem.
It gave developers a tool for writing simple programs quickly without sacrificing features that they depended on in lower level languages such as binary data, arbitrary size strings and system call access, the three of which did not, as far as I can recall, exist in any other high level language at the time, outside of Lisp and unlike Lisp, Perl felt comfortable and familiar to the average Unix user at the time.What will Perl 6 have going for it?It will be the first language to give you the rich dynamic OO features of Ruby and Smalltalk, blended with the self-hosted language introspection of Common Lisp and the still-familiar feel of Unix/Linux systems all on a portable and language-neutral VM.
Will that be a draw to the same sorts of users that cared strongly about Perl 5?
Some yes and some no, but there will be a brand new segment of the programming community that will care strongly about Perl 6 features.That's really all that matters, not how long it takes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345606</id>
	<title>Re:This has taken too long</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260092040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So what? PERL is just about dead, other than noddy shell like programming by admins thinking they real developers. The world moved on to new scripting languages that are far cleaner, and more maintainable a decade ago. PERL is done, it served its purpose and is now near obsolete. If you're waiting for v6 as something significant, you should probably hang up the keyboard, you're in old fart COBOL mode hanging on to the past.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what ?
PERL is just about dead , other than noddy shell like programming by admins thinking they real developers .
The world moved on to new scripting languages that are far cleaner , and more maintainable a decade ago .
PERL is done , it served its purpose and is now near obsolete .
If you 're waiting for v6 as something significant , you should probably hang up the keyboard , you 're in old fart COBOL mode hanging on to the past .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what?
PERL is just about dead, other than noddy shell like programming by admins thinking they real developers.
The world moved on to new scripting languages that are far cleaner, and more maintainable a decade ago.
PERL is done, it served its purpose and is now near obsolete.
If you're waiting for v6 as something significant, you should probably hang up the keyboard, you're in old fart COBOL mode hanging on to the past.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349520</id>
	<title>Re:Word on the street...</title>
	<author>Fotograf</author>
	<datestamp>1260123840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>that  explains the delay...

somebody tried to read the source code</htmltext>
<tokenext>that explains the delay.. . somebody tried to read the source code</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that  explains the delay...

somebody tried to read the source code</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345282</id>
	<title>Please let Perl die.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260132660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are much better designed languages available now<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>Efforts if any should be concentrated on porting stuff available only on<br>CPAN to Python, Ruby or other modern languages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are much better designed languages available now ...Efforts if any should be concentrated on porting stuff available only onCPAN to Python , Ruby or other modern languages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are much better designed languages available now ...Efforts if any should be concentrated on porting stuff available only onCPAN to Python, Ruby or other modern languages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30400186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30355302
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30359424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30370360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30363050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346468
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346014
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30352208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30348022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30363230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30363050
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345452
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_06_196202_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30348700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_06_196202.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345614
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_06_196202.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349964
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_06_196202.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30363050
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30370360
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30363230
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_06_196202.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345282
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_06_196202.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_06_196202.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345832
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_06_196202.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345600
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_06_196202.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30352208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30348022
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_06_196202.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346054
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30348700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30359424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30355302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_06_196202.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346040
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30400186
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347996
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347590
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30347006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30349628
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346506
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_06_196202.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345548
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_06_196202.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30346014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_06_196202.30345544
</commentlist>
</conversation>
