Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2013
RE: Perl 7 or Perl 2013?
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
vadim.konovalov
Date:
February 6, 2013 17:55
Subject:
RE: Perl 7 or Perl 2013?
Message ID:
35BF8D9716175C43BB9D67CA60CC345E028F552BF0@FRMRSSXCHMBSC2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com
> From: Ovid
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 5:07 PM, demerphq wrote:
>
> > I think this is a sane solution. Make it clear that Perl 5.14.2 is
> > actually Perl5 v14.2, which for all intents and purposes is the case.
p3rl.org name was invented for a reason,
maybe Perl5 <-> PerlS ?
PerlS v16.2
"S" looks like 5 - its like de-hackerization of Perl5, although l33t h4x0r
translator thinks 'S' is more like 2, not 5 :(
(I do not really like this idea though, so nevermind :) )
> I've been responding privately to a couple of folks to avoid
> making too many waves, but since this proposal is coming up a
> few times: I think we need to get rid of "5". That's the
> conceptual issue that people have and that they've hammered
> me with at FOSDEM, Linux Conf, OSCON and elsewhere. While I
> agree that "Perl5 v14.2" is better than what we currently
> have, I would love to see us bold enough to ditch the "5"
> altogether. Plenty of confusion would go away.
++
vouz avez reason.
BR,
Vadim.
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next