> a transition like Python2.0 to 3.0 that traded some backward compatibility for some structure COULD have been successful.
I think Perl was a lot further away than Python was from anything that would have allowed "trading some backward compatibility for some structure".
This was a clear case of a language collapsing under the weight of its own poor decisions and lack of coherent design. Could it have been kept on life support with a series of incremental improvements? Probably, but things wouldn't have gotten materially better for its users, and it would have bled users anyway as the industry left it behind.
I think Perl was a lot further away than Python was from anything that would have allowed "trading some backward compatibility for some structure".
This was a clear case of a language collapsing under the weight of its own poor decisions and lack of coherent design. Could it have been kept on life support with a series of incremental improvements? Probably, but things wouldn't have gotten materially better for its users, and it would have bled users anyway as the industry left it behind.