Re: perl6's new name?

[Laurent Rosenfeld via perl6-users]

Maybe I wasn't clear enough.  What I meant to say it that I wasn't
enthusiastic about a name change, but, if the name really has to change,
then Camelia is my favorite name.



Le mer. 14 août 2019 à 05:49, Eliza  a écrit :

> Hi,
>
> on 2019/8/14 5:19, Laurent Rosenfeld via perl6-users wrote:
> > Having said that, I should add that if the name should really change, I
> > think Camelia is probably the least bad idea that I can think of.
> >
>
> Following the link:
>
> https://medium.com/@ThePearlSource/pearls-and-birthstones-the-pearl-month-giveaway-f8c0da46fdc0
>
> June - Pearl
> July - Ruby
> August - Peridot
>
> So how about perl6 renames to Peridot or Peri?
>
> regards,
> Eliza
>

Re: perl6's new name?

[Marcel Timmerman]

Hi David,

I think you're right in this. While I like the name chosen by Eliza I 
also thought about the changes which will follow after the renaming. 
Like in documentation with mentions of perl6, websites, books, 
extensions of modules, programs and pod docs etc.


If it comes to renaming, Camelia is the name for me. I strongly oppose 
to Raku or other names referring to Rakudo, Moarvm or other 
implementation of perl6 because we should keep the freedom to change 
that name of the implementation without having to change the name of the 
language it implements. In the past it has been Parrot for example.


Marcel


On 8/11/19 11:14 PM, Eliza wrote:

Hello perl6 world,

I saw the perl6 github issue, just was confused will perl6 change its 
name?





https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/issues/81


I don't know whether to take this is troll bait or a real issue. Lots 
of people seem to be responding; so in case the issue is real, I will 
make two points against changing the name of Perl 6



From an X.Y major-minor version numbering system standpoint, X is 
incremented whenever the product changes significantly.  In the 
context of computer programming languages, source code incompatibility 
is an obvious criteria for changing X.  If source code is compatible 
after a change, then Y should be changed.  Perl 6 is significantly 
different from Perl 5, and, in general, Perl 6 programs are 
incompatible with the Perl 5 compiler/ interpreter and vice-versa.  
Therefore, the "6" was properly applied and "Perl 6" is correct.



From a practical standpoint, there is too much water under the bridge. 
Name changes need to be done up front (Ruby was done properly in this 
regard).



David

Re: perl6's new name?

[Eliza]

Hi,

on 2019/8/13 11:52, Veesh Goldman wrote:
All ML really happens in C++. The only advantage that python has is that 
people use it. P6 is flexible enough that I'm sure you can port 
TensorFlow using nativeCall within a month.
Perl as a whole has a terrible image problem. People think it's just awk 
with more punctuation variables. Literally, to most people Perl is regexes.
In my opinion, what we need is a tutorial website that ranks high on 
search engines for searches not about Perl, so that people will realize 
that Perl is very readable and very useful. But I digress.


Though I do use perl every day but just found this interesting article 
from Hacknews about python you may just give a try reading.


http://cloudcache.net/PythonCoverStoryNJH_FINAL.pdf

regards,
Eliza

Re: perl6's new name?

[Eliza]

Hi,

on 2019/8/14 5:19, Laurent Rosenfeld via perl6-users wrote:
Having said that, I should add that if the name should really change, I 
think Camelia is probably the least bad idea that I can think of.




Following the link: 
https://medium.com/@ThePearlSource/pearls-and-birthstones-the-pearl-month-giveaway-f8c0da46fdc0


June - Pearl
July - Ruby
August - Peridot

So how about perl6 renames to Peridot or Peri?

regards,
Eliza

Re: perl6's new name?

[Laurent Rosenfeld via perl6-users]

I don't think the decision has been made so far. At this point, it is a
proposal  by one (or possibly several) individual(s) whom I very much
respect.

And it is definitely not going to hapopen this week (and quite probably not
this month).

Even though my opinion on the subject is probably irrelevant to most
people, I want to say for the record that I'm personally not in favor of a
name change, as I'm afraid that this will make things even more complicated
than they currently are. Perl 6 has been known under this name for almost
20 years by now, giving it a new name now might just blur everything in the
mind of most people. "The ship has sailed," as they say. I'm afraid that
changing the name today might actually become a marketing disaster. And I
am not saying that as an author of one of the Perl 6 books, my concern is
really not to lose sales on my book (if it were, my book wouldn't be freely
available on-line and open source).

At the same time, I can certainly understand some of the arguments for a
name change.

Having said that, I should add that if the name should really change, I
think Camelia is probably the least bad idea that I can think of.

Cheers,
Laurent.


Le mar. 13 août 2019 à 21:46, William Michels via perl6-users <
perl6-users@perl.org> a écrit :

> I've put up two name suggestions for Perl 6:
>
> NUPERL:
> www.nuperl.orgwww.nuperl.comwww.nuperl.net
>
> NEUPERL:
> www.neuperl.orgwww.neuperl.comwww.neuperl.net
>
> Specifics:
> https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/issues/81#issuecomment-520960546
>
> I'm not sure why this decision has to be made now. A number of good
> books just released under the "Perl 6" name, so those authors will
> lose sales traction. But if a name-change is inevitable, it seems that
> the 5 year anniversary of the release of Perl 6 is coming up on
> Christmas Day, 2020. Why not then?
>
> I's primary season and election season in the US, so if someone wants
> to put up a Doodle-Poll, this might be fun. We can get a better idea
> of how popular the names Camelia, Raku, ofun, Nuperl, Neuperl,
> larrylang, Albus, Perlsix, Zeta, etc. are .
>
> https://beta.doodle.com/free-poll
>
> Otherwise, why this month? Why this week?
>

Re: perl6's new name?

[William Michels via perl6-users]

I've put up two name suggestions for Perl 6:

NUPERL:
www.nuperl.orgwww.nuperl.comwww.nuperl.net

NEUPERL:
www.neuperl.orgwww.neuperl.comwww.neuperl.net

Specifics: 
https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/issues/81#issuecomment-520960546

I'm not sure why this decision has to be made now. A number of good
books just released under the "Perl 6" name, so those authors will
lose sales traction. But if a name-change is inevitable, it seems that
the 5 year anniversary of the release of Perl 6 is coming up on
Christmas Day, 2020. Why not then?

I's primary season and election season in the US, so if someone wants
to put up a Doodle-Poll, this might be fun. We can get a better idea
of how popular the names Camelia, Raku, ofun, Nuperl, Neuperl,
larrylang, Albus, Perlsix, Zeta, etc. are .

https://beta.doodle.com/free-poll

Otherwise, why this month? Why this week?

Re: perl6's new name?

[David Christensen]

On 8/11/19 11:14 PM, Eliza wrote:

Hello perl6 world,

I saw the perl6 github issue, just was confused will perl6 change its name?





https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/issues/81


I don't know whether to take this is troll bait or a real issue.  Lots 
of people seem to be responding; so in case the issue is real, I will 
make two points against changing the name of Perl 6



From an X.Y major-minor version numbering system standpoint, X is 
incremented whenever the product changes significantly.  In the context 
of computer programming languages, source code incompatibility is an 
obvious criteria for changing X.  If source code is compatible after a 
change, then Y should be changed.  Perl 6 is significantly different 
from Perl 5, and, in general, Perl 6 programs are incompatible with the 
Perl 5 compiler/ interpreter and vice-versa.  Therefore, the "6" was 
properly applied and "Perl 6" is correct.



From a practical standpoint, there is too much water under the bridge. 
Name changes need to be done up front (Ruby was done properly in this 
regard).



David

Re: perl6's new name?

[David E.]

It's been said before, but I do think that the "Perl6" name is holding back
adoption.  Too many people think of the old Perl, and have no interest in
looking at what's changed in a new version of the "same" language.
Whatever the new name ultimately becomes, changing it (perhaps timed with a
new major release of the Rakudo implementation), would do much to improve
adoption.


Camelia could work, but I'll throw in another suggestion that's been in my
head for a while:  *PANL* - short for "Perl 6 is A New Language".
Alternatively, its components can be referred to as the "PAN Language",
"PAN Interpreter", "PAN Specification", etc with a possible logo being a
frying pan (held by a camel?) mixing up all of the best language concepts &
tools ;-)

It's short and makes clear that this is a part of the Perl family (for
those that care), while still conveying that it is, for all intents and
purposes, a new language.

-David

On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 1:21 AM BELOSCAR Christian <
christian.belos...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Camelia : Excellent idea Eliza, I totally agree with yours arguments and
> what a sympathetic non technical name
> accorded with its logo and attracting young programmers too. I vote for
> this choice with enthusiasm !
>
> Chris
>
> Le lun. 12 août 2019 à 08:15, Eliza  a écrit :
>
>> Hello perl6 world,
>>
>> I saw the perl6 github issue, just was confused will perl6 change its
>> name?
>>
>> Perl 6 was initially conceived to be the next version of Perl 5. It took
>> way too long to mature to an initial release. Meanwhile, people
>> interested in taking Perl 5 along, took back the reigns and continued
>> developing Perl 5.
>>
>> Having two programming languages that are sufficiently different to not
>> be source compatible, but only differ in what many perceive to be a
>> version number, is hurting the image of both Perl 5 and Perl 6 in the
>> world. Since the word "Perl" is still perceived as "Perl 5" in the
>> world, it only seems fair that "Perl 6" changes its name.
>>
>> Since Larry has indicated, in his video message to the participants of
>> PerlCon 2019 in Riga, that the two sister languages are now old and wise
>> enough to take care of themselves, such a name change would no longer
>> require the approval of the BDFL.
>>
>> I would therefore propose to change the name to "the Camelia Programming
>> Language" or "Camelia" for short, for several reasons:
>>
>> the search term "camelia programming language" already brings you to the
>> right place. This means that changing the name to "Camelia" will have
>> minimal impact on findability on search engines such as Google and
>> DuckDuckGo.
>>
>> the logo / mascot would not need changing: it's just that it now also
>> becomes the actual name of the programming language.
>>
>> "Camelia" in its name, still carries something Perlish inside of it.
>>
>> The concept of "Camelia" being an implementation of a specification in
>> "roast", still stands. The alternative, to use "Rakudo" as the name of
>> the language, would cause confusion with the name being used to indicate
>> an implementation, and would endanger the separation between
>> specification and implementation.
>>
>> Choosing yet another name, such as Albus, would mean having to start
>> from scratch with marketing and getting the name out there. Hence my
>> preference for a known name such as "Camelia".
>>
>> The "Camelia" logo is still copyright Larry Wall, so it would allow
>> Larry to still be connected to one of the programming languages that he
>> helped get into the world.
>>
>> https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/issues/81
>>
>> regards,
>> Eliza
>>
>

Re: perl6's new name?

[BELOSCAR Christian]

Camelia : Excellent idea Eliza, I totally agree with yours arguments and
what a sympathetic non technical name
accorded with its logo and attracting young programmers too. I vote for
this choice with enthusiasm !

Chris

Le lun. 12 août 2019 à 08:15, Eliza  a écrit :

> Hello perl6 world,
>
> I saw the perl6 github issue, just was confused will perl6 change its name?
>
> Perl 6 was initially conceived to be the next version of Perl 5. It took
> way too long to mature to an initial release. Meanwhile, people
> interested in taking Perl 5 along, took back the reigns and continued
> developing Perl 5.
>
> Having two programming languages that are sufficiently different to not
> be source compatible, but only differ in what many perceive to be a
> version number, is hurting the image of both Perl 5 and Perl 6 in the
> world. Since the word "Perl" is still perceived as "Perl 5" in the
> world, it only seems fair that "Perl 6" changes its name.
>
> Since Larry has indicated, in his video message to the participants of
> PerlCon 2019 in Riga, that the two sister languages are now old and wise
> enough to take care of themselves, such a name change would no longer
> require the approval of the BDFL.
>
> I would therefore propose to change the name to "the Camelia Programming
> Language" or "Camelia" for short, for several reasons:
>
> the search term "camelia programming language" already brings you to the
> right place. This means that changing the name to "Camelia" will have
> minimal impact on findability on search engines such as Google and
> DuckDuckGo.
>
> the logo / mascot would not need changing: it's just that it now also
> becomes the actual name of the programming language.
>
> "Camelia" in its name, still carries something Perlish inside of it.
>
> The concept of "Camelia" being an implementation of a specification in
> "roast", still stands. The alternative, to use "Rakudo" as the name of
> the language, would cause confusion with the name being used to indicate
> an implementation, and would endanger the separation between
> specification and implementation.
>
> Choosing yet another name, such as Albus, would mean having to start
> from scratch with marketing and getting the name out there. Hence my
> preference for a known name such as "Camelia".
>
> The "Camelia" logo is still copyright Larry Wall, so it would allow
> Larry to still be connected to one of the programming languages that he
> helped get into the world.
>
> https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/issues/81
>
> regards,
> Eliza
>

Re: perl6's new name?

[Veesh Goldman]

All ML really happens in C++. The only advantage that python has is that
people use it. P6 is flexible enough that I'm sure you can port TensorFlow
using nativeCall within a month.
Perl as a whole has a terrible image problem. People think it's just awk
with more punctuation variables. Literally, to most people Perl is regexes.
In my opinion, what we need is a tutorial website that ranks high on search
engines for searches not about Perl, so that people will realize that Perl
is very readable and very useful. But I digress.

On Tue, Aug 13, 2019, 05:18 Francis Grizzly Smit  wrote:

>
> On 13/08/2019 12:03, Eliza wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> on 2019/8/13 3:17, Stephen Wilcoxon wrote:
>
> Perl, on the other hand, can do anything Python can (except stackless)
> and,
> generally, just as easily.
>
>
> I don't think so specially in AI/ML field.
>
> Python can handle primitive types much better than ruby/perl can at the
> moment. And has much less of an overhead, compared to ruby where almost
> everything is a FixNum etc (perl is even worse on types), where Python can
> see the actual integer or float and calculations can run at close to C++
> speeds.
>
>
> Python handles types differently than perl6 but certainly not better, even
> perl 5 only has a few deficits compared to python mostly it's just
> different
>
>
> --
>
>.~. In my life God comes first
>/V\ but Linux is pretty high after that :-D
>   /( )\Francis (Grizzly) Smit
>   ^^-^^http://www.smit.id.au/
>
>

Re: perl6's new name?

[Eliza]

Hi,

on 2019/8/13 3:17, Stephen Wilcoxon wrote:

Perl, on the other hand, can do anything Python can (except stackless) and,
generally, just as easily.


I don't think so specially in AI/ML field.

Python can handle primitive types much better than ruby/perl can at the 
moment. And has much less of an overhead, compared to ruby where almost 
everything is a FixNum etc (perl is even worse on types), where Python 
can see the actual integer or float and calculations can run at close to 
C++ speeds.

Re: perl6's new name?

[Eliza]

Hi,

on 2019/8/13 2:17, Stephen Wilcoxon wrote:
I love Perl but it has an image problem.  If Perl didn't have an image 
problem,

Python never would have become so popular.


can you give more detailed description what image problem perl has? thanks.

Re: perl6's new name?

[David Green]

It’s far from obvious that playing with the name is likely to make things 
significantly better. Perl 6 has been P6 longer than Perl 5 had been P5 — or 
Perl Anything — at the time it was conceived. That’s not to say nothing should 
be done about it, but as some people have pointed out in the Github thread, 
there are important issues to be dealt with first. In the meantime, that would 
give an opportunity for anyone who is serious about the marketing side of 
things to do some actual research instead of guessing what we think might 
possibly help sort of.


> On 2019-Aug-12, at 11:57 am, Richard Hainsworth  
> wrote:
> There are is one statement in Eliza's original text that is not correct, and 
> several that are debatable.
Here’s the original text quoted from LizMat's Github issue: 
https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/issues/81 


Perl 6 certainly started out as the next version of Perl 5 (hence the “6” in 
the name), and had Larry been able to see into the future, no doubt the 
marketing would have been different. And we should care about marketing, 
because Perl(s) exist in a market of programming languages, and if the product 
isn’t profitable (in a programming-language sense) then eventually there will 
by nobody left to develop and maintain it and write modules for it. Which would 
be a real shame.
But of course you’re right that there needs to be a good reason for whatever 
course of action is chosen, and I don’t see what that reason is.


-David

Re: perl6's new name?

[Joseph Brenner]

> If Perl had worked harder to stay in the public eye in a good way (rather
than being viewed as dieing), there wouldn't have been a perceived
need for Python.

As I remember it, there was a concerted attack on perl with Python
being held up as the-anti-perl.  There wasn't (yet) any question of
perl dieing.

My take-- which I owe a lot to Steve Yegge's peculiar writings on the
subject-- is that the computer science intelligensia were actively
offended by that upstart outsider Larry Wall was showing you could do
things differently and still come up with something useful.

Re: perl6's new name?

[Joseph Brenner]

I think:

(1) For a rename to happen, Larry Wall really has to sign off on it:
this is just a social reality of the perl world.

(2) The rename really has to be an announced, offical rename.   It
can't be just an alias or a knickname or anything like that.

I find I like the name Camelia in part because Larry might actually
sign-off on it, in part because most of the alternatives I've heard
proposed ("raku", "six", etc) seem very awkward.

It does not seem that this issue is going to go away without a rename.

Names are important to perception, and they can matter critically to
the outside world.


On 8/12/19, Richard Hainsworth  wrote:
> 
>>
>> The decision on perl 5 vs perl 6 naming is more revolutionary but it
>> IS hurting
>> Perl.  I love Perl but it has an image problem.
> True. Would a name change now have much effect?
>> If Perl didn't have an image problem,
>> Python never would have become so popular.
> Mmmm.  That is a very strong assertion and diminishes Python and its
> developers. It's the sort of statement that can't easily be tested. More
> a belief.
>>   Perl used to be THE scripting
>> language.
> True. And C was THE programming language. Life moves on. And in circles.
> Fashions come and go, and what was fashionable can again be so.
>>   It doesn't matter that it is still around and still continuing to be
>> developed.
>> What matters is people's PERCEPTIONS of Perl (dead, dieing,
>> irrelevant, etc).
>>
>> Too little was done for too long about Perl's image.  It may be too
>> late to bring it
>> back into the forefront as it used to be.
>
> Being excited about a language and using it for cool things - and
> broadcasting to the world that its cool will do more to change
> perceptions that Perl is cool, than a name change to Camilea.
>
> As you said: Perceptions are the most important thing.
>

Re: perl6's new name?

[Stephen Wilcoxon]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 1:42 PM Richard Hainsworth 
wrote:
>
> > The decision on perl 5 vs perl 6 naming is more revolutionary but it
> > IS hurting
> > Perl.  I love Perl but it has an image problem.
> True. Would a name change now have much effect?
> > If Perl didn't have an image problem,
> > Python never would have become so popular.
> Mmmm.  That is a very strong assertion and diminishes Python and its
> developers. It's the sort of statement that can't easily be tested. More
> a belief.


Not really.  If Perl had worked harder to stay in the public eye in a good
way (rather
than being viewed as dieing), there wouldn't have been a perceived need for
Python.

Python is fundamentally flawed (significant whitespace was stressed in
multiple classes
in grad school as something to NEVER do when designing a language (and an
older one
that I can no longer remember was used as the example)).

> >   Perl used to be THE scripting
> > language.
> True. And C was THE programming language. Life moves on. And in circles.
> Fashions come and go, and what was fashionable can again be so.

The big difference being that C is a primitive (as in very low-level)
language that is
great for some things but requires far more work than "modern" languages
for a
lot of things.  If you don't need the speed, there's little reason to use C
these days.

Perl, on the other hand, can do anything Python can (except stackless) and,
generally, just as easily.

Re: perl6's new name?

[Parrot Raiser]

"5" is a version number of Perl. To run it, $/usr/bin/perl "6" is part
of the name of Perl6.
To run it, $/usr/bin/perl6.

With the production version of Perl incremented by 2 every year, it's
still about 35 years before the version gets to an inconvenient 3
digits. (Will there really be enough worth changing that many times,
and how many of us will still be around to care?)

Energy expended in nominal disputes would be better spent producing
killer apps in some fashionable area (AI, ML, even a web framework),
so that people  don't care what the language is called, they just want
to use it. Ruby applications might be a good place to start, since
that community seems to have fractured, and Perl6 has a lot in common
with Ruby.

On 8/12/19, Richard Hainsworth  wrote:
> 
>>
>> The decision on perl 5 vs perl 6 naming is more revolutionary but it
>> IS hurting
>> Perl.  I love Perl but it has an image problem.
> True. Would a name change now have much effect?
>> If Perl didn't have an image problem,
>> Python never would have become so popular.
> Mmmm.  That is a very strong assertion and diminishes Python and its
> developers. It's the sort of statement that can't easily be tested. More
> a belief.
>>   Perl used to be THE scripting
>> language.
> True. And C was THE programming language. Life moves on. And in circles.
> Fashions come and go, and what was fashionable can again be so.
>>   It doesn't matter that it is still around and still continuing to be
>> developed.
>> What matters is people's PERCEPTIONS of Perl (dead, dieing,
>> irrelevant, etc).
>>
>> Too little was done for too long about Perl's image.  It may be too
>> late to bring it
>> back into the forefront as it used to be.
>
> Being excited about a language and using it for cool things - and
> broadcasting to the world that its cool will do more to change
> perceptions that Perl is cool, than a name change to Camilea.
>
> As you said: Perceptions are the most important thing.
>

Re: perl6's new name?

[Richard Hainsworth]

The decision on perl 5 vs perl 6 naming is more revolutionary but it 
IS hurting

Perl.  I love Perl but it has an image problem.

True. Would a name change now have much effect?

If Perl didn't have an image problem,
Python never would have become so popular.
Mmmm.  That is a very strong assertion and diminishes Python and its 
developers. It's the sort of statement that can't easily be tested. More 
a belief.

  Perl used to be THE scripting
language.
True. And C was THE programming language. Life moves on. And in circles. 
Fashions come and go, and what was fashionable can again be so.
  It doesn't matter that it is still around and still continuing to be 
developed.
What matters is people's PERCEPTIONS of Perl (dead, dieing, 
irrelevant, etc).


Too little was done for too long about Perl's image.  It may be too 
late to bring it

back into the forefront as it used to be.


Being excited about a language and using it for cool things - and 
broadcasting to the world that its cool will do more to change 
perceptions that Perl is cool, than a name change to Camilea.


As you said: Perceptions are the most important thing.

Re: perl6's new name?

[Stephen Wilcoxon]

I agree that the "incorrect statement" was factually incorrect.  However, it
was widely perceived to be correct.  That perception did hurt perl (both 5
and 6).
It made many people see perl as "dead" while perl 6 was under development.

>>> "It took way too long to mature to an initial release"
>
> 1. Yeah, it too a long time. Yeah that really really depressed me. But
> to be fair, the task was not trivial. And the timescale is shorter than
> it has taken humanity to return to the Moon! But now, things are
> different. I only use Perl 6 when I have the choice. When I need speed,
> I go to Perl 5, or to C. When I have in-browser stuff, I use javascript.
> When I do Android apps, I bang my head to get Java to work. Etc etc etc.
> Given the diversity of hardware and operating systems today, I doubt
> there will ever be a single universal language for all things.

Because many people believed the incorrect statement, the length of time
it took to implement perl 6 was too long.  A lot of people viewed perl as
dead
or in limbo.

>>> "Having two programming languages that are sufficiently different to
>>> not be source compatible, but only differ in what many perceive to be a
>>> version number, is hurting the image of both Perl 5 and Perl 6 in the
world"
>
> 2. "Hurt the image"? That is marketing speak. Marketing speak has its
> uses. But if the Perl community wants to be different, why do we need to
> kowtow to marketing gurus? Just because others do it, doesn't mean we
> have to. Especially not if there is a really good reason not to. I
> happen to agree with Larry that the continuing unity of the Perl
> community, with two sister languages that interact with each other, is
> very very valuable, and not to be easily sacrificed on the altar of
> fashionable phrases. Unity is much more valuable than the 'benefits' of
> 'brand image'.

I agree the unity of the Perl community is important.  However, I'm not sure
that outweighs the external perceptions.  People are used to higher versions
being mostly backwards-compatible but perl 6 is not.  This has managed to
put perl in a worse situation than Python (2 vs 3) in a lot of people's
perceptions.

>>> "such a name change would no longer require the approval of the BDFL"
>
> 3. The Benevolent Dictator still lives, and there are revolutionaries
> and revisionists who want to change things? Well I'm sympathetic to
> revolutionaries. Two things though: Whose exactly approval is to be
> required for a name change? And actually I think that Larry Wall is
> still more revolutionary in his decision to have the sister languages of
> Perl 5 and Perl 6 than all those parroting the market speak about name
> change and brand value.

The decision on perl 5 vs perl 6 naming is more revolutionary but it IS
hurting
Perl.  I love Perl but it has an image problem.  If Perl didn't have an
image problem,
Python never would have become so popular.  Perl used to be THE scripting
language.  It doesn't matter that it is still around and still continuing
to be developed.
What matters is people's PERCEPTIONS of Perl (dead, dieing, irrelevant,
etc).

Too little was done for too long about Perl's image.  It may be too late to
bring it
back into the forefront as it used to be.

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 12:58 PM Richard Hainsworth 
wrote:
>
> On the topic raised by Eliza, a counter rant. Hopefully, everyone will
> detect the humour (English spelling) and not take offence.
>
> There are is one statement in Eliza's original text that is not correct,
> and several that are debatable. The debatable statements are
> understandable, and entirely reasonable per se, given the way software
> and other languages are developed. The statements are not however
> consistent with the distinct and unique way that Larry Wall has guided
> the development of Perl since he first wrote Perl 1.
>
> The 'name' issue has been hotly debated for years. Larry has made a
> decision.
>
> Whatever way one might feel about his decision, an over-riding
> consideration (looking at Larry's words) is one of unity: keeping the
> whole Perl world together, and not letting it shatter into pieces over
> shibboleths. I think that this unity is really important and well worth
> fighting for. More power to Larry!
>
> Incorrect statement: "Perl 6 was initially conceived to be the next
> version of Perl 5."
>
> No. It might be correct to say that Perl 6 was conceived to be the next
> evolution of **Perl**. It was never ever conceived to be backwards
> compatible, in fact it was explicitly designed _not_ to be backwards
> compatible, and so was never the 'next Perl 5'. There was / is a goal to
> allow for most Perl 5 programs / modules to be automatically re-written
> into Perl 6, and there is already the possibility of writing Perl 5 code
> inline in a Perl 6 program. But inlined Perl 5 remains Perl 5.
>
> Perl 5 has developed significantly since the Perl 6 evolution process
> began. That just shows the power and resiliance of the original 

Re: perl6's new name?

[Richard Hainsworth]

On the topic raised by Eliza, a counter rant. Hopefully, everyone will 
detect the humour (English spelling) and not take offence.


There are is one statement in Eliza's original text that is not correct, 
and several that are debatable. The debatable statements are 
understandable, and entirely reasonable per se, given the way software 
and other languages are developed. The statements are not however 
consistent with the distinct and unique way that Larry Wall has guided 
the development of Perl since he first wrote Perl 1.


The 'name' issue has been hotly debated for years. Larry has made a 
decision.


Whatever way one might feel about his decision, an over-riding 
consideration (looking at Larry's words) is one of unity: keeping the 
whole Perl world together, and not letting it shatter into pieces over 
shibboleths. I think that this unity is really important and well worth 
fighting for. More power to Larry!


Incorrect statement: "Perl 6 was initially conceived to be the next 
version of Perl 5."


No. It might be correct to say that Perl 6 was conceived to be the next 
evolution of **Perl**. It was never ever conceived to be backwards 
compatible, in fact it was explicitly designed _not_ to be backwards 
compatible, and so was never the 'next Perl 5'. There was / is a goal to 
allow for most Perl 5 programs / modules to be automatically re-written 
into Perl 6, and there is already the possibility of writing Perl 5 code 
inline in a Perl 6 program. But inlined Perl 5 remains Perl 5.


Perl 5 has developed significantly since the Perl 6 evolution process 
began. That just shows the power and resiliance of the original Perl 
concept, and the creativity of Perl 5 developers. The 'next versions' of 
Perl 5 compared to the Perl 5 that existed when the first Perl 6 
Apocalypses were written, have already landed. Perl 5 remains a great 
modern language. That in itself is a different gloss to 'took back the 
reigns', by which I mean that the same facts of history can be treated 
in very different ways if you change your perspective. Not everything in 
life has to correspond to simple explanations, or sound bites 
convertible into limited character messages.


The debatable statements include:

- "It took way too long to mature to an initial release"

- "Having two programming languages that are sufficiently different to 
not be source compatible, but only differ in what many perceive to be a 
version number, is hurting the image of both Perl 5 and Perl 6 in the world"


- "such a name change would no longer require the approval of the BDFL"

1. Yeah, it too a long time. Yeah that really really depressed me. But 
to be fair, the task was not trivial. And the timescale is shorter than 
it has taken humanity to return to the Moon! But now, things are 
different. I only use Perl 6 when I have the choice. When I need speed, 
I go to Perl 5, or to C. When I have in-browser stuff, I use javascript. 
When I do Android apps, I bang my head to get Java to work. Etc etc etc. 
Given the diversity of hardware and operating systems today, I doubt 
there will ever be a single universal language for all things.


2. "Hurt the image"? That is marketing speak. Marketing speak has its 
uses. But if the Perl community wants to be different, why do we need to 
kowtow to marketing gurus? Just because others do it, doesn't mean we 
have to. Especially not if there is a really good reason not to. I 
happen to agree with Larry that the continuing unity of the Perl 
community, with two sister languages that interact with each other, is 
very very valuable, and not to be easily sacrificed on the altar of 
fashionable phrases. Unity is much more valuable than the 'benefits' of 
'brand image'.


3. The Benevolent Dictator still lives, and there are revolutionaries 
and revisionists who want to change things? Well I'm sympathetic to 
revolutionaries. Two things though: Whose exactly approval is to be 
required for a name change? And actually I think that Larry Wall is 
still more revolutionary in his decision to have the sister languages of 
Perl 5 and Perl 6 than all those parroting the market speak about name 
change and brand value.


Richard

aka finanalyst

On 12/08/2019 07:14, Eliza wrote:

Hello perl6 world,

I saw the perl6 github issue, just was confused will perl6 change its 
name?


Perl 6 was initially conceived to be the next version of Perl 5. It 
took way too long to mature to an initial release. Meanwhile, people 
interested in taking Perl 5 along, took back the reigns and continued 
developing Perl 5.


Having two programming languages that are sufficiently different to 
not be source compatible, but only differ in what many perceive to be 
a version number, is hurting the image of both Perl 5 and Perl 6 in 
the world. Since the word "Perl" is still perceived as "Perl 5" in the 
world, it only seems fair that "Perl 6" changes its name.


Since Larry has indicated, in his video message to the participants of 

Re: perl6's new name?

[Erez Schatz]

It's all bike-shedding.

On 8/12/19 9:14 AM, Eliza wrote:

Hello perl6 world,

I saw the perl6 github issue, just was confused will perl6 change its 
name?


Perl 6 was initially conceived to be the next version of Perl 5. It 
took way too long to mature to an initial release. Meanwhile, people 
interested in taking Perl 5 along, took back the reigns and continued 
developing Perl 5.


Having two programming languages that are sufficiently different to 
not be source compatible, but only differ in what many perceive to be 
a version number, is hurting the image of both Perl 5 and Perl 6 in 
the world. Since the word "Perl" is still perceived as "Perl 5" in the 
world, it only seems fair that "Perl 6" changes its name.


Since Larry has indicated, in his video message to the participants of 
PerlCon 2019 in Riga, that the two sister languages are now old and 
wise enough to take care of themselves, such a name change would no 
longer require the approval of the BDFL.


I would therefore propose to change the name to "the Camelia 
Programming Language" or "Camelia" for short, for several reasons:


the search term "camelia programming language" already brings you to 
the right place. This means that changing the name to "Camelia" will 
have minimal impact on findability on search engines such as Google 
and DuckDuckGo.


the logo / mascot would not need changing: it's just that it now also 
becomes the actual name of the programming language.


"Camelia" in its name, still carries something Perlish inside of it.

The concept of "Camelia" being an implementation of a specification in 
"roast", still stands. The alternative, to use "Rakudo" as the name of 
the language, would cause confusion with the name being used to 
indicate an implementation, and would endanger the separation between 
specification and implementation.


Choosing yet another name, such as Albus, would mean having to start 
from scratch with marketing and getting the name out there. Hence my 
preference for a known name such as "Camelia".


The "Camelia" logo is still copyright Larry Wall, so it would allow 
Larry to still be connected to one of the programming languages that 
he helped get into the world.


https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/issues/81

regards,
Eliza

Re: perl6's new name?

[JJ Merelo]

Hi,

El lun., 12 ago. 2019 a las 8:15, Eliza () escribió:

> Hello perl6 world,
>
> I saw the perl6 github issue, just was confused will perl6 change its name?
>

Yes, it might. Perl 6 will still be the language, but the implementation
(the stack including MoarVM, NQP and Rakudo) will be called Camelia. That's
the proposal, needs to be approved (or rejected).

Cheers

JJ