Yuki Kimoto's Perl Blog

As one of Perl user, +1 "use v7;" in newer version of Perl.

The use v syntax is worth it.

use v5.14

This syntax is the history of Perl and is also a mechanism for maintaining backward compatibility with newer versions of Perl.

The reason this was not used is simply the small granularity.

I don't remember much about Perl, so I can't tell the difference between use v5.20 and use v5.30.

And because the warnings and utf8 aren't turn on, I couldn't find a meaning to actively use it.

use v7; is very easy to understand.

use v7;

Imagine an application user actively uses it instead of writing use strict, use warnings, use utf8;, use feature'say', ....

I also think that I use it aggressively in application code.

Even if I don't use it when writing CPAN modules.

Larry said. "If you put a new bag in an old one, it will break.", quoting the Bible

I believe that accepting Perl's history is also valuable to Perl.

Perl 5 is not broken

Many people see Perl 5 as broken, but in reality Perl 5 isn't.

The biggest problem was the negative campaign from other programming languages.

Perl is fairly well crafted to do text processing on a single thread on Linux/Unix.

Specially Unix/Linux text proceccing, one liner, Realtime Web Application is very very good.

I dislike the word "Wrong design in Perl 5".

Perl 5 works very well for a particular jobs.

No human is perfect, and its existence contains some mistakes.

I don't want Perl 8 break CPAN modules.

I have red that Perl 7 does not break CPAN modules written in Perl 5, but Perl 8 break.

We don't want to reduce the biggest benefit of Perl's backward compatibility to fix small mistakes.

The problem is messaging to young people rather than Perl 5.

Young people have always believed the lie that there is an improved language over Perl for the dishonest media.

I believe Perl 5 is worth delivering.

See alos Leon's thinking. I'm same type engineer.

Perl 7, not quite getting better yet | Leon Timmermans [blogs.perl.org]