|
Posted by Gordon Etly on April 15, 2008, 11:40 am
Please log in for more thread options Chris Mattern wrote:
>> Gordon Etly schrieb:
>>> Jim Cochrane wrote:
>>>> (I better stop replying now before we get too far sidetracked from
>>>> perl vs. Perl vs. PERL vs. pERL .......)
>>>
>>>
>>> Just for the record, that was never my plight. But alas it is no
>>> use, I see, given of all the closed-mindedness abound; what ever
>>> happened to free thinking? Not one soul had actually addressed the
>>> question itself: why is it wrong to use PERL if 'perldoc perl'
>>> gives it a meaning that can be shortened to just "PERL"?
>>
>> Not only that. With 'perldoc perl' in perl 5.8.2 I indeed do get
>> three different spellings ("perl", "Perl", _and_ "PERL"):
>>
>>> PERL(1) perl v5.8.2 (2004-02-16)
>>> PERL(1)
>>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> perl - [...]
>>>
>>> If you're new to Perl, [...]
>>
>> ;-)
>>
> No, the usage of "perl" and "Perl" is correct. "perl" refers to
> the program, which is what the first line is describing. "Perl"
> means the language in the abstract, which is what the second line
> is talking about
Yes, we all know that, and that is not the point I have tried to make.
What is so wrong with adding to that list,
"PERL" refers to "Practical Extraction and Report Language" ?
That IS how acronyms work, whether people like you want to admit it or
not.
--
G.Etly
|