Slash Boxes
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

chromatic (983)

  (email not shown publicly)

Blog Information [] Profile for chr0matic []

Journal of chromatic (983)

Sunday February 04, 2007
07:53 PM

Note to $self

[ #32319 ]

Anyone who can't spell "Perl 6" correctly (note the space) hasn't paid enough attention to the language to know anything about it to discuss it cogently. Thus, arguing with them on the Internet is a severe waste of my time.

That is all.

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • You mean like the fine folks who created the Perl6 FAQ [] (note the lack of a space)?

    I had no problem finding other examples scattered around.

    Perl6: The PERL of the 21st century!

    • No kidding. I once corrected everything in Pugs, but that was a long time ago and I grew tired of chasing it down.

      • Er, the "Perl6 FAQ" page is not hosted as part of the Pugs repository (note the URL: [] ) so I'm not exactly sure what the relevance is...
        • I changed the subject halfway through the comment; I didn't mean to imply any sort of connection that is or isn't there. It was merely an example of a spot where I could and did make corrections for a while.

          I apologize for any confusion.

          • Ah ok, no apologies needed, I was indeed simply confused.

            (In the spec, the canonical spelling seems to be "Perl 6" instead of "Perl 6" -- with U+00A0 NO-BREAK SPACE instead of U+0020 SPACE. So perhaps the U+0020 form can be considered as an ASCII fallback approximation...)

    • Patches or just corrections are always welcome to webmaster at the obvious domain. []

      (I fixed the references in the FAQ FWIW).

        - ask

      -- ask bjoern hansen [], !try; do();

  • You remind me of people who bitch about perl vs Perl. It just plain doesn't fucking matter.
    • I don't take writing tips from people who can't spell or conjugate. I don't hire database administrators who "know Postgre" or system administrators who "run RedHat". Why do the opinions of people who don't even know the name of the language (SmallTalk, LISP, ADA) matter?

      Programmers do have to manage fine details occasionally. I look for people who can handle that.

      • I'm just giving you my worldly advice. You're welcome to ignore it.

        I know .HTM - gizza job.
        • I do appreciate it. You've demonstrated you're smart and capable and dependable many times over. I'm not flipping your bozo bit if you miss a space sometimes.

          It's more that I'm giving myself permission to use a really simple discriminator to see where I should spend my valuable arguin' time. More and more, it's not on the Internet.

          • It's more that I'm giving myself permission to use a really simple discriminator to see where I should spend my valuable arguin' time. More and more, it's not on the Internet.

            You've only just found out that arguing with all comers on the Internet is a waste of time????


      • Strange then, that mr. Kay talks [] about 'Smalltalk' instead of 'SmallTalk', and the ISO home of Ada standard spells [] it as 'Ada'. :-)
        All that is gold does not glitter...
        • Isn't it also strange that Red Hat's site spells it "Red Hat" or that Postgre isn't the name of a database?

          Contrarily, I do have the LISP 1.5 Programmer's Manual.

          • Maybe I misunderstood you. Did you mean that people who spell it 'SmallTalk' and 'ADA' get it wrong? (That'll teach me to do Monday-morning comments without having had coffee :-)
            All that is gold does not glitter...
  • The problem is that nobody has defined correct usage and even the project itself is inconsistent. Either use of "Perl6" or "Perl 6" seems completely understandable in a domain where spaces in filenames or package names (e.g. Perl6::) tend to cause problems.

    Perhaps you should add it to the O'Reilly Word List [], which shows no consistent rule other than product preference (e.g. Mac OS X, but Oracle9i).
  • Have you ever considered that some people leave out the space between Perl and 6, entirely on purpose? Based not on their ignorance, but their opinion that the 6 should be part of the name, and written without whitespace to more clearly indicate this?

    It all started making sense to me when I first saw someone refer to "Perl6 1.0.0". With another space, "Perl 6 1.0.0" it looks silly to me. Since then, I've never been consistent about Perl6 versus Perl 6, simply because while most people around me write it wit
    • It all started making sense to me when I first saw someone refer to "Perl6 1.0.0".

      I was always under the impression that 6 was the version number, thus the first release will be Perl 6.0.0. I suppose I can see how some people consider the name of the language to be "Perl 6" such that it needs separate version numbers, but that seems strange to me (probably because I don't use Java and rarely use Solaris).

      I hope that you will still discuss Perl\s?6 with me.

      Of course; you're demonstrably clueful on

      • I do think that Perl 6 really is an entirely different language. It’s Perl II, if you will, more so than it is Perl 6.x. It is Perl in spirit, but so different from the predecessor in so many aspects that it’s clearly a new generation, not just a new version.

        Not sure which nomenclature should be adopted, though, since I lean on the side of good usage, like you.

        • I agree with the "new generation" idea, but the naming idea is pretty moot. If there's one thing that Larry really owns, in a moral sense if nothing else, it's the name "Perl" and the ability to say what is and isn't Perl.

        • I quite agree. It's probably too late now, but I'd prefer if it were called Saphire or something (Perl, Quartz, Ruby, Saphire). I think a different name would have gone a long way to address a lot of misunderstandings and complaints about Perl 6. C++ is more like C than Perl 6 is like Perl 5. I suspect the Modula dialects are more like Pascal than Perl 6 is like Perl 5.

          On the other hand, in 10 years it won't matter. Perl 6 will have succeeded or not on its own merits, not based on its name.