On Dec 1, 12:47 pm, "J. Clifford Dyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 12:10 -0800, Russ P. wrote: > > On Dec 1, 2:10 am, Bjoern Schliessmann <usenet- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Russ P. wrote: > > > > I agree that Python is not a good name for a programming language, > > > > Why not? > > > Think about proposing its use to someone who has never heard of it > > (which I did not too long ago). As the OP pointed out, a Python is a > > snake. Why should a programming language be named after a snake? > > That's not a persuasive argument. > > First of all, Python is named for a comedy troupe from England. For > comparison, Perl is named for a knitting technique, Lisp is named for a > speech impediment, Ruby is named for a rock, Smalltalk is named for a > not-so-useful form of communication, and Java is named after a beverage > or an island. > > Which of those is a good name for a programming language by your > criterion?
None. None of them are good names by my criteria. But then, a name is only a name. One of the few names I like is Pascal, because he was a great mathematician and scientist. After thinking about it a bit, here are examples of what I would consider a good name for a programming language: Newton# Newton* Newton+ Newton was a great scientist, and his name is easy to spell and pronounce. The trailing character serves to disambiguate it from Newton in online searches. For shorthand in online discussions, N#, N*, or N+ could be used as aliases. Names of other great scientists, mathematicians, or computer scientists could also be used, of course. Take your pick. How about renaming Python3000? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
