Thanks, I was hoping someone would do the search that the original poster appears to not have done.
This isn't much different than a ton of other configuration differences.
I can ask a question for which the answers are quite independent of operating system (because Perl provides a good, portable solution for what I was asking about), and Perl version (because the solution don't have need for very new features so they all work for even quite old versions of Perl), and other possible configuration differences.
If discussing Perl one-liners, then the Unix users are going to be writing perl -e '...' examples and the Win32 users are going to be writing perl -e "..." examples. A few will recognize the potential for confusion and address it.
If I ask a question about a specific problem I am having using some regular expressions and note that I'm using Perl 5.006_00, it doesn't mean that answers dealing with Perl 5.009_01 can't be useful, because the problem might be enough to make upgrading Perl worthwhile for me.
So I think there will be many threads where even Perl 5 vs. Perl 6 won't matter. They'll be even more threads were some parts address Perl 5, some parts address Perl 6, some parts apply equally to both, and some parts don't have much to do with either one.
I liked the "use 5.006;" idea and I hope that Perl 6 will support it. So, for quite a while, if I publish Perl 6 code that is not meant to run in Perl 5, I'll include "use 6;" in it. And that should include code I write here.
I'm don't see how any formalized system of trying to mark threads or nodes as "Perl 5" or "Perl 6" could avoid being either very inaccurately applied or very incompletely applied.
I could see proposing an informal convention of including "(p6)" in nodes that are specific to Perl 6, starting now, while such nodes are still quite rare. When Perl 6 gets rolling along, we could propose doing a similar convention for "(p5)". And as those finally start becoming rare, we could propose that the "(p6)" convention be dropped.
