> : also - why does it have to be tied to perl (in name) at all?
>
> Er, because we're writing it?
>
> : I like the idea
> : that it would *not* be tied to perl, ie: it would be more generic if it was
> : not named after it.
>
> Well, the fact that Tcl and Tk both start with T didn't stop people from
> abstracting it away. I think that has little to do with the name, but with
> how generally useful the platform is.
true, but names are important, if for nothing but psychological reasons. For
example, I think that the ruby/python/whatever folks would be more motivated to
develop a version of their language under <insert code name here> if the name
of the underlying technology was language neutral....
> : How about 'prism' (ie: multiple languages from one underlying platform)?
>
> Do a search for "prism" on Yahoo and then come back with a serious
> suggestion. There's even a "Prism programming language" out there.
> (And yes, I did do a search for "perk" before I suggested it.)
fair enough, but just to be clear I *did* do a search on prism. I just was too
lazy to go past the 'category' matches (where there was no entry for a prism
programming language). I suppose I should have been put off by the 235 entries
though in the category page..
> New-age-techie words like "prism" are an attractive nuisance, and
> should be avoided if we want people to find our stuff.
hm. I suppose you wouldn't be into mangling the name (ex: prysm), or into
something longer like 'palimpset'... or 'pisa' (which I'm beginning to like
better)..
Ed
