[% setvar title Merge Perl and C#, but have default Main class for scripting. %]
<div id="archive-notice">
    <h3>This file is part of the Perl 6 Archive</h3>
    <table bgcolor="red"><tr><td><font color="white"> Note: these documents may be out of date. Do <b>not</b> use as reference!</font></tr></td></table>
    <p>To see what is currently happening visit <a href="http://www.perl6.org/">http://www.perl6.org/</a></p>
</div>
<div class='pod'>
<a name='TITLE'></a><h1>TITLE</h1>
<p>Merge Perl and C#, but have default Main class for scripting.</p>
<a name='VERSION'></a><h1>VERSION</h1>
<pre>  Maintainer: Timothy Covell &lt;<a href='mailto:dirac@ashavan.org'>dirac@ashavan.org</a>&gt;
  Date: 29 Sep 2000
  Mailing List: <a href='mailto:perl6-internals@perl.org'>perl6-internals@perl.org</a>
  Number: 352
  Version: 1
  Status: Developing</pre>
<a name='ABSTRACT'></a><h1>ABSTRACT</h1>
<p>Several Perl6 RFCs have stated that &quot;everything should become
an object&quot;.  I agree with this idea.  I would go further and
state that perl should become an OO language at its core but
still retain a procedural front-end.</p>
<a name='DESCRIPTION'></a><h1>DESCRIPTION</h1>
<p>First, let me state that I am not a language architect.  However,</p>
<p>First, let me state that I am not a language architect.  However,
I am a fan of Perl and like what I see of the core C# _language_.
What I propose is to move Perl in the C# direction.  The KEY
difference is that Perl would have an defacto Main class whose
defacto main method which would be indestinquishable from a
legacy procedural based script.  Of course, one is free to
override the builtin Main class with his own Main class and
his own main method, and thus work in a pure OO mode.</p>
<p>To those would would direct me to use Python or Ruby
instead, I would counter with a couple of points.  First, Perl's
syntax is more in line with C, C++, ObjC, Java, and C#.  Second,
Perl's syntax is more powerful (safer too) than that of indentation
based languages.  Third, since C# and Java can be implemented as
a subset of C++, I imagine that Perl6 could also be implemented
thus.  Fourth, due to the aforementioned similarities, defining
an intermediate language (a.k.a. bytecode) would be simpler.
Fifth, I like Perl, but wish it could do versioning and objects
better.  Lastly, I don't want to have to get locked into the
Microsoft or Sun &quot;Cathedral&quot; platforms.</p>
<p>Finally, to those who think that object orientation is crazy,
I would suggest that you look at Perl5 and PostgreSQL.  Perl5
as we all know has OO extentions.  And, as I am sure that most
of us know already, PostgreSQL is an open source RDBMS that is
more properly called  an &quot;object-relational&quot; database.  At it's
heart each entry is an object and has an object id.  Yet, it
retains the traditional RDBMS/SQL interface.</p>
<a name='IMPLEMENTATION'></a><h1>IMPLEMENTATION</h1>
<p>As previously stated, I am not a systems programmer nor a language
architect; I am a systems administrator.  Thus, I cannot offer
an implementation.  However, I think that this idea holds water.</p>
<a name='REFERENCES'></a><h1>REFERENCES</h1>
<p>RFC 73: All Perl core functions should return objects</p>
<p>RFC 159: True Polymorphic Objects</p>
<p>RFC 161: Everything in Perl becomes an object.</p>
<p>RFC 171: my Dog $spot should call a constructor implicitly</p>
</div>