Note that if we want scripts to be interpreter-agnostic, the perl6 binary needs to exist for #! purposes. So renaming it would be bad, but a simlink would work.
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 2:27 PM Brock Wilcox <awwa...@thelackthereof.org> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 11:39 AM, webmind <webm...@puscii.nl> wrote: > >> >> Yes, wouldn't it make sense to couple the rakudo release version to the >> language it implements? >> > > Naw -- there'll be probably monthly rakudo releases but the Specification > releases should be much less frequent -- like maybe every few months (at > first) or yearly is my guess. > > This might be less confusing if: > * We referred more often to rakudo instead of perl6 when we mean the > implementation (you compile with gcc, not "c"; rakudo confusingly calls > it's interpreter "perl6") > * Get more implementations! If we had like 3-4 implementations to choose > from then it might be more obvious what was going on. > > Probably there would be a stronger argument for the "perl6" binary to be > either renamed to "rakudo" or to be a symlink to whatever your > current-perl6-implementation is were there an alternative implementation > ... but there isn't... so ... I guess someone should do that. :) > > ... though there actually ARE a few others, but none nearly as complete as > Rakudo, afaik > > * https://github.com/sorear/niecza - CLR > * http://fglock.github.io/Perlito/ - Perlito6 written mostly in Perl6 > (lots of other interesting Perlito stuff) > * http://perl6.org/compilers/features - comparison > * several abandoned ones (e.g. Pugs) > > --Brock > >
