Re: PERL to mean what 'perldoc perl' says is wrong? (was: Re: perl should be improved and perl6)

Chris Mattern wrote:
On 2008-04-15, Achim Peters <achimpeters@xxxxxx> wrote:
Gordon Etly schrieb:
Jim Cochrane wrote:
(I better stop replying now before we get too far sidetracked from
perl vs. Perl vs. PERL vs. pERL .......)


Just for the record, that was never my plight. But alas it is no
use, I see, given of all the closed-mindedness abound; what ever
happened to free thinking? Not one soul had actually addressed the
question itself: why is it wrong to use PERL if 'perldoc perl'
gives it a meaning that can be shortened to just "PERL"?

Not only that. With 'perldoc perl' in perl 5.8.2 I indeed do get
three different spellings ("perl", "Perl", _and_ "PERL"):

PERL(1) perl v5.8.2 (2004-02-16)
PERL(1)

[...]

perl - [...]

If you're new to Perl, [...]

;-)

No, the usage of "perl" and "Perl" is correct. "perl" refers to
the program, which is what the first line is describing. "Perl"
means the language in the abstract, which is what the second line
is talking about

Yes, we all know that, and that is not the point I have tried to make.

What is so wrong with adding to that list,

"PERL" refers to "Practical Extraction and Report Language" ?

That IS how acronyms work, whether people like you want to admit it or
not.

--
G.Etly


.

Relevant Pages