A) Complete is when the compiler(s) actually implement all of the spec, for starters.
B) Nice examples. Well done. But it's not about whether you can do the simple things. It's more about the impression of the community and where its interest and focus lies.
I'd rather use a language where the mundane day-to-day stuff is the most important consideration. My impression of Perl6, however unfair that may be, is that the day-to-day functionality is the boring necessary evil that must be in there somewhere, but the true focus is the amazing stuff you can do with a language that's simultaneously trying to be a better Perl, and a better Lisp, and a better Erlang, and a better Haskell.
In my mind, Perl6 is a huge lumbering beast that tries to do absolutely everything. I'm sure if I ever feel the need to write a lazy asynchronous parser script, it'll be the first language that leaps to mind. In the meantime, I don't have the time nor the interest to bother.
My perspective as a Perl5 dev: Perl6 just doesn't interest me.
The two main reasons: (a) It's still not finished, but mostly (b) all I ever see is people in love with how clever they can be with the language.
I don't need to see hyper-clever ways of using built-in lazy memoised lists to generate a Fibonacci sequence in a dozen keystrokes. If I get tempted over to Perl6 (or any other language) it'll be be by examples of how easy it makes the boring, mundane tasks that I actually need a langauge for - things like reading from/writing to files; handling dates/times nicely; etc. etc.
What I like about Perl5 is its "Make the easy things easy and the hard things possible" mantra. The only mantra I hear from Perl6 is "Look how cleverly you can solve this contrived example". That's not something I care about in the slightest when I think about what language to write my next program in.
Hedgehogs aren't nearly as common road-kill casualties as people tend to think - it's just that their prickles break down really slowly, so we see more of their remains on the road than other animals. Not because so many of them die, just because the evidence hangs around longer.
..but it's git. Github don't host your repo - they host a copy of it. You still have all your work in your local checkout. What are you concerned about?
Not a fair comparison - the store can and will track my habits just as easily via the card I pay with. If I forsake the loyalty card, I don't get my privacy back - I just get tracked via another method unless I go out of my way to always carry enough cash to pay anonymously.
All the loyalty card does is allow them to track the occasional time I DO pay with cash, which is insignificant enough to be worth the discount. If a store made a genuine, binding offer to only track people with loyalty cards, THEN your question would be a valid comparison. At the moment, it just isn't.
It's really distracting that typing in the REPL changes the size of the containing div.
The blurry photo of (I assume) the audience of a lecture just doesn't work - what's it supposed to do?
There's very little useful information - everything is at least one click away. If the whole purpose of the site is to 'sell' to a new audience then I guess that's not an issue, but I expect to be able to go to the site of a language & get very quickly and easily to useful manual/wiki pages explaining whatever feature I'm having trouble with.
The basic style is very 'modern' but it looks more like a Kickstarter page that's there to sell you something trendy and new than the front page of a site giving you information about a language. It's very pretty but (to me) sends completely the wrong message about what this site is.
I actually find the "no end in sight" aspect of BW work to be really helpful: I don't have to worry about what happens when I "run out" of exercises, there will always be another progression: Pullups are getting too easy? Try one-arm pullups. Pushups getting too easy? Work on handstand pushups.
etc. etc.
The important thing is to ensure that you feel like you're making progress on each workout: Adding reps, moving to a harder version, or just improving form. Stagnating is an absolute killer.
Lost my interest at "A New Workout Every Day" - that's the antithesis of useful training:
"Exercise is physical activity for its own sake...Training is physical activity done with a longer-term goal in mind...random exposure to a variety of different movements at different intensities...is Exercise, not Training, since it is random, and Training requires that we plan what we are going to do to get ready for a specific task." - Mark Ripptoe
It also removes the ability to accurately track progression, which is something that tends to matter to the geek with a fitness app. AKA your target market.
Anyone else remember Microsoft cheerfully getting a US judge to overrule a German court decision? Only to now insist that a US court can't compel them to hand over an Irish server. Their views on jurisdiction matters seem to be remarkably flexible...
B) Nice examples. Well done. But it's not about whether you can do the simple things. It's more about the impression of the community and where its interest and focus lies.
I'd rather use a language where the mundane day-to-day stuff is the most important consideration. My impression of Perl6, however unfair that may be, is that the day-to-day functionality is the boring necessary evil that must be in there somewhere, but the true focus is the amazing stuff you can do with a language that's simultaneously trying to be a better Perl, and a better Lisp, and a better Erlang, and a better Haskell.
In my mind, Perl6 is a huge lumbering beast that tries to do absolutely everything. I'm sure if I ever feel the need to write a lazy asynchronous parser script, it'll be the first language that leaps to mind. In the meantime, I don't have the time nor the interest to bother.