On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 04:21:12PM +0100, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote: > Considering that the specification is sortof actually a language > specification, I think there should at least be some terms regarding how > this should apply.
Just to nit semantics a bit and push a little harder on something I've generally not pushed too much in the past... I believe that the Perl 6 language "specification" is actually the test suite. Synopsis 1 even indicates this somewhat explicitly: "Perl 6 is anything that passes the official test suite" and "... Perl 6 is defined primarily by its desired semantics, not by accidents of history." To me, the Synopses are primarily a detailed language description, and I'm increasingly wishing we wouldn't consider them as "the language specification"... > Forking the documentation, or creating derivative works, shouldn't be a > problem, as long as it doesn't change the specification in itself, and > thereby create confusion regarding what the Perl 6 specification is. ...and this is the exact reason for that wish. The documentation isn't the specification at all -- the test suite is. Pm
