SD Times columnist Andrew Binstock has come out with [another poorly informed column]( that says nothing more than “Perl hasn’t updated in years, and therefore is irrelevant.”
Let’s look at his errors and FUD:
* Not recognizing Perl 5.6, 5.8 and 5.10 as “major releases”
* “Perl’s penchant for near-hieroglyphic syntax.”
* Quoting TIOBE as a meaningful indicator of anything.
* “Perl 6 release is still a long way off” — Can you tell us when it will be, Mr. Binstock?
* “still five years later, we’re years away.” — Apparently, he thinks he can, and he’s wrong.
* “Perl has only the original Perl implementation plus an experimental version in Haskell under development.”
So, although I wish he wouldn’t have written such an error-filled column, I’m still glad he did. Why? Because he’s showing that Perl is anything but irrelevant or doomed.
If Perl were truly doomed, and Perl 6 were never going to come out, then why would he bother writing a column about it? Why not write a column about how nobody uses COBOL or Forth? That Perl and the future of Perl is a topic for publication just shows that Perl is anything but dead.
For more about the bright future of Perl, including Perl 5, see Piers Cawley’s excellent article [“The Perl Future”](–/features/112388)
> I see an active Perl 5 community, working on and with, excellent tools on CPAN… I see Perl 6 and Parrot hitting their targets. This isn’t crystal ball gazing. This is what’s happening now…. Perl isn’t moribund. 2009 won’t be a make or break year – I doubt we’ll see fireworks, but I think that developments like Perl-On-A-Stick and Moose will continue to make life easier for curious newcomers, old hands and even returnees like me.