Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- From: "Gordon Etly" <get@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 11:47:44 -0700
A. Sinan Unur wrote:
"Gordon Etly" <get@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:65v00iF2i1cpsU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
Abigail wrote:
_
Gordon Etly (get@xxxxxxxxxxx) wrote on VCCCXXXIII September
MCMXCIII in <URL:news:65t6g3F2huv6jU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
This last quote is contradicted by the main Perl document,
that gives the "NAME" of the language as:
"perl - Practical Extraction and Report Language"
Which IS an acronym.
No, it's not.
I'm sorry, but you are mistaken. (Please see below.)
No he is not.
The documentation disagrees with you both then.
This is reminding me of a friend who used to pronounce doughnut
as duf-nut because he thought the '-ough' in both dough and
tough ought to sound the same.
Ok. But what does this have to do with how the
He was able to advance many logical arguments why he was right,
but, alas, he was wrong.
The correct answer is the one adopted by native Perl
speakers whether you find that logical or not:
Ok, nice analogy, but in this case, it's you who are in your friend's
position, arguing against the written authoritative documentation.
Perl's own _docs_ spell out an acronym, so please stop ignoring this.
http://perldoc.perl.org/perlfaq1.html#What's-the-difference-between-%22perl%22-and-%22Perl%22%3f
You seem to have missed this part:
"You may or may not choose to follow this usage"
And,
"But never write "PERL", because perl is not an acronym",
is completely contrary to what 'perldoc perl' says:
http://perldoc.perl.org/perl.html
NAME
perl - Practical Extraction and Report Language
Which spells out a meaning for each letter, so hence, an acronym. Using
"perl" or "PERL" can denote such an acronym, so stop saying it's wrong
to use any of those forms.
That FAQ should be corrected because it is wrong. The main documentation
should always carry more weight than user-contributed content, should it
not?
Even Larry himself dubbed Perl as meaning what the NAME line says it is,
so why continue to push something that is proven wrong by both it's
top-most document and it's creator?
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/3394
"Eventually I came up with the name "pearl", with the gloss
Practical Extraction and Report Language"
This is, by any definition, an acronym, spelled out in full. Given that
the 'a' was dropped, you get P-E-R-L out of it.
--
G.Etly
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- From: Abigail
- Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- References:
- perl should be improved and perl6
- From: jm
- Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- From: V.Ronans
- Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- From: John Bokma
- Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- From: Gordon Etly
- Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- From: John Bokma
- Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- From: Gordon Etly
- Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- From: Frank Seitz
- Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- From: Gordon Etly
- Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- From: Abigail
- Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- From: Gordon Etly
- Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- From: A. Sinan Unur
- perl should be improved and perl6
- Prev by Date: Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- Next by Date: FAQ 8.32 How can I write expect in Perl?
- Previous by thread: Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- Next by thread: Re: perl should be improved and perl6
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|