My personal favorite resolution is to officially name the language Rakudo, full
The implementation that was/is using the name would be renamed to something else
so it isn't the same as the language.
Then we say "Rakudo" is a sibling language of "Perl", full stop.
Then "Perl 6" becomes a deprecated alias for Rakudo, used informally rather than
formally from now on, and officially considered a historical footnote rather
than anything still cited in official documentation or marketing.
The unqualified name "Perl" continues to refer to the original lineage
(currently at version 5.x) such as what 99% of the world means when they refer
Remember, we can still say "Rakudo is a sibling of Perl" for all the reasons we
currently do without actually calling it any kind of "Perl" as an individual; we
don't actually lose the family thing.
For documentation/marketing materials and to help with continuity, we can
typically reference "the Rakudo language, a sibling of Perl", where the latter
part is then more of a description.
This is what I really think should and that I would like to happen.
-- Darren Duncan
On 2018-02-08 12:47 PM, yary wrote:
...and "rakudo" even
better by that criterion. And then there's how "rakudo" is already named in many
files, databases, websites, and that's enough to make me think it's a "good
enough" name. Though I'd like to change that implementation's name to something
else if we start calling the language Rakudo!
I quite like having the distinction between the language and its
implementations. No one confuses C with cc, gcc, pcc, tcc, mvcc, XCode, or
Borland. Using the name "rakudo" to mean the language makes me feel a little bad
in that it muddies that distinction further, and gives this current
implementation a special status. A status which it earned, we're not talking
about calling the Perl6 language "pugs" or "parrot" or "niecza" for a reason.