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)


Reply via email to