use Perl

• Nonsense (Score:2)

  by Juerd (1796)

  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
  • Re: (Score:1)

    by chromatic (983)

    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
    • Re:Nonsense (Score:1)

      by Aristotle (5147) <pagaltzis@gmx.de> on 2007.02.07 2:55 (#53085) Homepage Journal

      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.

      Reply to This

      Parent

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by chromatic (983)

        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.
      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Crag (6470)

        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.