comment on

In the Healthcheck: Perl article mentioned in Healthcheck and the Perl Future, the author suggests that he and others think that Perl 5.10.0 should really be called Perl 5 Version 10.0.

I hadn't heard this before, but the more I reflect on it, the more I like the idea. For one, I think it sort of helps differentiate Perl 5 and Perl 6 as different languages, rather than as successor languages. Additionally, it's a subtle marketing trick to defeat the "no major release of Perl" in X years FUD, as it makes "Perl 5" a language and "Version 10" a major new release.

Had others heard this meme before? If so, where? And what do you think about the idea?

-xdg

Code written by xdg and posted on PerlMonks is public domain. It is provided as is with no warranties, express or implied, of any kind. Posted code may not have been tested. Use of posted code is at your own risk.

In reply to Perl 5.10.0 or Perl 5 Version 10? by xdg

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW
	PerlMonks