I'm working on docs/S28draft.pod in the pugs project. And consulting perl5's
perlvar.pod, the issue of "use English" comes up. AFAICT from various sources,
little has been said about this
NOTE:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/perl.perl6.language/msg/fa241233bcfba024:
"we've already been th
David Vergin skribis 2005-04-11 9:44 (-0700):
> What's the word. Will there be something like "use English"?
Yes, and it's the default :)
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html
http://convolution.nl/gajigu_juerd_n.html
On Mon, 2005-04-11 at 14:31, Juerd wrote:
> David Vergin skribis 2005-04-11 9:44 (-0700):
> > What's the word. Will there be something like "use English"?
>
> Yes, and it's the default :)
Yes, but it will be spelled:
use $*LANG ;-)
Seriously, is there some reason that we would not prov
Aaron Sherman skribis 2005-04-11 14:49 (-0400):
> Yes, but it will be spelled:
> use $*LANG ;-)
> Seriously, is there some reason that we would not provide a
> "Language::Russian" and "Language::Nihongo"? Given Perl 6, it would even
> be quite valid for those modules to add aliases for all of
On 2005-04-11 15:00, "Juerd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm not even sure I like the *possibility* of using non-ascii letters in
> identifiers, even.
I agree that it would be a nightmare if project A used presu instead of
print everywhere, while project B used toon, etc. But non-ASCII iden
On Mon, 2005-04-11 at 15:00, Juerd wrote:
> Aaron Sherman skribis 2005-04-11 14:49 (-0400):
> > Yes, but it will be spelled:
> > use $*LANG ;-)
> > Seriously, is there some reason that we would not provide a
> > "Language::Russian" and "Language::Nihongo"? Given Perl 6, it would even
> > be qui
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Juerd wrote:
Seriously, is there some reason that we would not provide a
"Language::Russian" and "Language::Nihongo"? Given Perl 6, it would even
[snip]
Because providing it leads to its use, and when it gets used, knowing
English is no longer enough.
I have some code that uses
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 03:42:25PM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
> I don't think you can say (as Larry has) that you want to be able to
> fully re-define the language from within itself and still impose the
> constraint that "it can't confuse people who don't know anything about
> my module."
>
> Yo
Thomas Yandell skribis 2005-04-12 13:13 (+0100):
> According to Wikipedia there are around 400 million native English speakers
> and 600 million people who have English as a second language. Should the
> remaining ~5.5 billion humans be exluded from writing perl code just so that
> we English sp
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 02:38:01PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> (Still, having them around does help many people, and that's why I think
> perldocs should perhaps come in several languages (as a different
> project, so translation delays don't delay Perl releases)).
"Should" ?
Who is going to pay for a
Nicholas Clark skribis 2005-04-12 13:58 (+0100):
> > (Still, having them around does help many people, and that's why I think
> > perldocs should perhaps come in several languages (as a different
> > project, so translation delays don't delay Perl releases)).
> "Should" ?
Yes, should. That's ideol
On Tuesday 12 April 2005 07:42 am, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 03:42:25PM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
> > > I'm not even sure I like the *possibility* of using non-ascii letters
> > > in identifiers, even.
> >
> > I think we already have Latin-1 in identifiers...
>
> more's the
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 02:38:01PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> Thomas Yandell skribis 2005-04-12 13:13 (+0100):
> > According to Wikipedia there are around 400 million native English speakers
> > and 600 million people who have English as a second language. Should the
> > remaining ~5.5 billion humans
> > > I'm not even sure I like the *possibility* of using non-ascii letters
> in
> > > identifiers, even.
> > I think we already have Latin-1 in identifiers...
>
> more's the pity.
According to Wikipedia there are around 400 million native English speakers
and 600 million people who have Engli
But your numbers are utterly useless, as they are counts of humans, not
> programmers. I think that the number of programmers who don't understand
> English is very small. They know English because historically, the
> programmer's world has been English.
My point was that English speakers are in
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 03:09:10PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> Nicholas Clark skribis 2005-04-12 13:58 (+0100):
> > > (Still, having them around does help many people, and that's why I think
> > > perldocs should perhaps come in several languages (as a different
> > > project, so translation delays don't
Nicholas Clark skribis 2005-04-12 14:34 (+0100):
> > Yes, should. That's ideology, though.
> I read "should" as a danger word. It's often person A describing a desirable
> feature and intimating that unspecified other people B-Z ought to be
> implementing it.
Please note that I try to not think ab
Juerd skribis 2005-04-12 15:46 (+0200):
> Please note that I try to not think about who's going to implement it at
> all. That makes being creative and coming up with good ideas much, much
> easier.
And to be honest, it makes coming up with bad ideas much easier than
that even :)
Juerd
--
http:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 03:46:03PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> Yes, if it is done, people are indeed involved, but if we all agree that
> something must happen, that's not terribly relevant. And before we can
That's another dangerous word.
> If stuff is only happening because people c
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 03:48:02PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> Juerd skribis 2005-04-12 15:46 (+0200):
> > Please note that I try to not think about who's going to implement it at
> > all. That makes being creative and coming up with good ideas much, much
> > easier.
>
> And to be honest, it makes comin
Nicholas Clark skribis 2005-04-12 14:52 (+0100):
> > Yes, if it is done, people are indeed involved, but if we all agree that
> > something must happen, that's not terribly relevant. And before we can
>
> That's another dangerous word.
Not in combination with "if we all agree" :)
On Tue, 2005-04-12 at 07:42, David Cantrell wrote:
> > You might argue that Language::Dutch should never ship with the core...
> > that's a valid opinion, but SOMEONE is going to write it. It'd be a kind
> > of strange form of censorship for CPAN not to accept it. After all,
> > there's more than
Juerd wrote:
According to Wikipedia there are around 400 million native English speakers
and 600 million people who have English as a second language. Should the
remaining ~5.5 billion humans be exluded from writing perl code just so that
we English speakers can understand all the code that is w
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 01:25:15PM +1200, Sam Vilain wrote:
: Juerd wrote:
: >>According to Wikipedia there are around 400 million native English
: >>speakers and 600 million people who have English as a second language.
: >>Should the remaining ~5.5 billion humans be exluded from wri
Larry Wall wrote:
> Well, only if you stick to a standard dialect. As soon as you start
> defining your own macros, it gets a little trickier.
Interesting, I hadn't considered that.
Having a quick browse through some of the discussions about macros, many
of the macros I saw[
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 12:45:14PM +1200, Sam Vilain wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: > Well, only if you stick to a standard dialect. As soon as you start
: > defining your own macros, it gets a little trickier.
:
: Interesting, I hadn't considered that.
:
: Having a quick browse through some of th
26 matches
Mail list logo
