On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:44:03 +0300, Damyan Ivanov wrote: > > > For what it's worth, here's a comment from 'mst' the author of the > > > module. > > > "the .pl in re.pl shouldn't be considered to be a suffix, it's simply > > > part of the name of the script" > > Right, in this case that might be a valid reason for an exception. > I somehow don't believe that the dot is also part of the name. The dot > is there to emphasize on the fact that this is a Perl implementation, > contrary to what the Policy suggests.
I think that this is a play on words: Devel::REPL -> REPL -> re.pl. But of course "repl" would also be possible, and I'm still not convinced that a basically one-line script is that helpful in /usr/bin (and then there's still the missing manpage). Cheers, gregor -- .''`. Home: http://info.comodo.priv.at/{,blog/} / GPG Key ID: 0x00F3CFE4 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux User, Admin, & Developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT, SPI Inc., Fellow of FSFE | http://got.to/quote/ `- NP: Paul Simon: Kodachrome
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
