Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks vroom
There's more than one way to do things
 
PerlMonks  

perl6 or not perl6 ...

by monkey_boy (Curate)
on Mar 09, 2006 at 11:13 UTC ( #535371=perlmeditation: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

that is the question!
Note: this is not intended as a serious question, just a little fun!
Q: Given that perl6 appears to be *very* different from perl as we know (and love) it, should it be called perl6 or something else?, please add your suggestions or vote!
  • perl6
  • perl++
  • turbo perl
  • perlthon


This is not a Signature...

Comment on perl6 or not perl6 ...
Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by izut (Chaplain) on Mar 09, 2006 at 11:36 UTC
    Anything but "Perl 2007" or "dotPerl" :)

    Igor 'izut' Sutton
    your code, your rules.

        It was the same for Windows 95, wasn't it? Or did some other popular software start the name-things-after-their-release-date fad?
Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by zentara (Archbishop) on Mar 09, 2006 at 11:51 UTC
    Perl XP (xtra powerful)

    I'm not really a human, but I play one on earth. flash japh
Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by marto (Chancellor) on Mar 09, 2006 at 12:32 UTC
    <joke>A rose by any other name... unless it were named Vista :P</joke>

    Martin
      You meant thisVista, too?

      Or even this Vista - who have a horrible programming language called Vista-4GL.

      --

      Oh Lord, wonít you burn me a Knoppix CD ?
      My friends all rate Windows, I must disagree.
      Your powers of persuasion will set them all free,
      So oh Lord, wonít you burn me a Knoppix CD ?
      (Missquoting Janis Joplin)

      I'll throw this Vista into the ring as well.

      Cheers,

      Brent

      -- Yeah, I'm a Delt.
Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by ciderpunx (Vicar) on Mar 09, 2006 at 12:42 UTC
      I'd prefer my perl on the rocks.

      And it looks like perl6 may leave us shaken AND stirred...

        Perl on the Skids?

        merlyn once suggested Perl on Planks.

        Makeshifts last the longest.

Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by jdhedden (Deacon) on Mar 09, 2006 at 13:56 UTC
    Perl NG
    NG = Next Generation if you like it, or No Good if you don't.

    In any case, I agree that it should be called something other than Perl 6.

    Remember: There's always one more bug.
      And then we can call our present Perl, Perl TOS!

      TOS = The Original Series, for all you non-Trekkies out there.

      CountZero

      "If you have four groups working on a compiler, you'll get a 4-pass compiler." - Conway's Law

Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by Jenda (Abbot) on Mar 09, 2006 at 14:12 UTC

    Not sure, but ... is the difference between Perl5 and Perl6 really that much bigger than the one between Perl4 and Perl5 was? I think it's actually smaller, but that's just me.

      im afraid i wasnt around for perl4, well i was around, but in school shorts ;), so i cant comment on how different it was.
      In any case, maybe they has this same disscussion then as well.


      This is not a Signature...

      is the difference between Perl5 and Perl6 really that much bigger than the one between Perl4 and Perl5 was?

      Yes.

      Much Perl 4 code still runs unmodified on Perl 5. While much of the internals changed, the language did not really change much. It got new features, but almost none of the existing language was changed.

      Perl 6 code is always different from Perl 5 code. There is a different operator precedence table, operators themselves are different, it lacks some (deprecated) Perl 5 features, and even has a different vocabulary.

      From 4 to 5, most of the source was rewritten. From 5 to 6, all will.

      And it was about time.

      Juerd # { site => 'juerd.nl', plp_site => 'plp.juerd.nl', do_not_use => 'spamtrap' }

        You are and are not right. Yeah you can run Perl4 scripts by perl5 while you ... well, they all say you'll be able to run Perl5 scripts by perl6 ;-) But conceptually I think there was a huge gap between Perl4 and Perl5. You've got real references, real datastructures, real lexical variables, objects ... an improved shell became a fullblown general-purpose language. So yes, you'll get some new operators, you get different precedence (ack?!?), you get some more OO features, you get what non-perl-people call function prototypes, you get a brand new source tree, but ... well, it's hard to compare :-)

        I agree with Jenda here, actually. Whether the code written for the older version runs on the newer one is not really the determining factor in my mind.

        What counts is that idiomatic Perl 5 is very different from idiomatic Perl 4 in architecture, whereas idiomatic Perl 6 wonít be nearly as different from idiomatic Perl 5, at least in everyday code that does not strain against the limitations of Perl 5 too hard. Perl 4 was really more of a scriptable tool, whereas Perl 5 is a serious language.

        Perl 6 does not really reform the way systems written in Perl are to be architectured, it just makes these architectures easier to implement by putting various and sundry premanufactured, well-designed nuts and bolts into the language, so you donít have to spend so much time building them all yourself.

        In syntax, it is a much bigger departure from Perl 5 than Perl 5 was from Perl 4; but in spirit, Perl 6 is much closer to Perl 5 than Perl 5 is to Perl 4.

        Makeshifts last the longest.

Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by spiritway (Vicar) on Mar 09, 2006 at 15:44 UTC

    Logically, the answer is simple. We'd have to name it 'Swine' (Perl before swine, after all)...

Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by samizdat (Vicar) on Mar 09, 2006 at 16:00 UTC
    Allll riiiight, who's the drip * 5 who downvoted monkey_boy??? He DID say it's about fun!

    Pfarcically Excruciatingly Reactionary L... it's not done yet?        oh.



    Note: This post is completely in jest. I truly DO value the hard work all of those who really DO contribute put into Perl6 and FreeBSD and all other open source projects I use and love!

    Don Wilde
    "There's more than one level to any answer."
Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by VSarkiss (Monsignor) on Mar 09, 2006 at 17:26 UTC
Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by radiantmatrix (Parson) on Mar 09, 2006 at 17:35 UTC

    Considering that Perl6 will run Perl5 code directly, I don't think the very different moniker really works. Perl6 is the next version of Perl after Perl5 -- I don't see why it should be a different name.

    <-radiant.matrix->
    A collection of thoughts and links from the minds of geeks
    The Code that can be seen is not the true Code
    I haven't found a problem yet that can't be solved by a well-placed trebuchet

      Perl6 will run Perl5 code directly

      The implementation of Perl 6 will probably have some heuristics for detecting Perl 5 code, and can (if compiled with support for it) invoke an (external or embedded) interpreter for it. However, the language Perl 6 is not compatible with Perl 5.

      Juerd # { site => 'juerd.nl', plp_site => 'plp.juerd.nl', do_not_use => 'spamtrap' }

Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by Anonymous Monk on Mar 09, 2006 at 17:36 UTC
    Blue Sky Perl
Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by eyepopslikeamosquito (Canon) on Mar 09, 2006 at 20:05 UTC

    I noticed TheDamian's recent linux.conf.au 2006 talk in Dunedin was titled:

    Sex *and* Violence: Technical and Social Lessons from the Perl 6 Development (or why Larry gets the colon and we should not have called it Perl 6)
    However, I don't know what he suggested it should have been called or why he asserts it shouldn't have been called Perl 6 (perhaps to reduce expectations). If any monk attended this talk, please enlighten us. :-)

    I found two links describing the talk:

    If anyone knows of better talk links or slides, please let us know. Ta.

Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by Argel (Prior) on Mar 09, 2006 at 21:46 UTC
    • Dromedary (one hump camels)
    • Bactrian (two hump camels)
    • Pteriidae (the Oysters that produce pearls with value)
    • Nacre (mother-of-pearl)
    • Black Perl
    • Perl of Power (from D&D)
    • PoP (Perl on Parrot)
    • Perl RFC Forever (ala Duke Nukem)
    • Marble Madness!! =:-)
    • LAMPost
    • P++
    Hopefully at least one of these is good... ;-)
Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by rvosa (Curate) on Mar 09, 2006 at 22:28 UTC
    ruby++?
Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by perlhaq (Scribe) on Mar 10, 2006 at 03:12 UTC
    eXtreme Perl!
Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by ady (Deacon) on Mar 10, 2006 at 06:20 UTC
    from scallop
    scalar list object programming
    to conch
    comprehensively orchestrated neo computational hybrid
    or something ... :)

    Allan
Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by gam3 (Curate) on Mar 10, 2006 at 13:56 UTC
    perl#
    -- gam3
    A picture is worth a thousand words, but takes 200K.
Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by tbone1 (Monsignor) on Mar 10, 2006 at 14:02 UTC
    How about: Canada!

    *chirping crickets*

    What, it's being used already? Who knew?

    --
    tbone1, YAPS (Yet Another Perl Schlub)
    And remember, if he succeeds, so what.
    - Chick McGee

Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by roboslug (Sexton) on Mar 11, 2006 at 04:24 UTC
    Juju
    Gives Perl6 a claim on the mysteries of the universe and the soul...

    Also, depending on the number of bugs in any given piece of code, it can be Good Juju, Bad Juju, or BAD Juju (goes either way to the extreme...inflection required for meaning). BAAAAAAAD Juju is the best, while "BAD JUJU!" is the worst.

    PerlPants
    Simply because resumes and job postings would become that much more amusing ...

    PPerl
    Who knows what that first "P" is...which adds one more letter to the mystery that is P E R L.

    What
    Nobody knows for certain anyway and it will be great fun in conversations.

      Who knows what that first "P" is...which adds one more letter to the mystery that is P E R L.

      exists, and the first "P" stands for persistent.

      Juerd # { site => 'juerd.nl', plp_site => 'plp.juerd.nl', do_not_use => 'spamtrap' }

Re: perl6 or not perl6 ...
by gloryhack (Deacon) on Mar 11, 2006 at 21:15 UTC
    We should change the name to an unpronouncable symbol, and refer to it as "the first unpronouncably-named iteration of the language formerly known as Perl".

    Or, we could just call it "42".

      But whatís the question?

      Makeshifts last the longest.

        How many robes must a camel put on ...

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: perlmeditation [id://535371]
Approved by wfsp
Front-paged by hsmyers
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chilling in the Monastery: (6)
As of 2014-04-17 01:48 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    April first is:







    Results (437 votes), past polls