Re:Is Smalltalk a weird cause to fight for?
by eesmith on Tuesday December 24, 2019 @10:44PM
(#21876650)
I said "that language stopped in the 1960s while other Lisp dialects".
I thought it was clear that I was referring to the specific implementation which died with Lisp 1.5.
Because "Raku" refers to a specific implementation name in the Raku-like languages, of which Perl 6 is one. And the Raku evangelist seems to argue that it was incorrect to describe a Raku evangelist as "a Perl 6" evangelist.
I was drawing a parallel. If a modern Lisp system can be referred to as a Lisp, then why can't Raku be referred to as a Perl 6?
Now, I'm perfectly fine with saying this is a sociological question, and that the members of the group get to decide their name. I also think there are limits to that framework. For one, it leads to gatekeeping. If a Scheme or Clojure users says they are using a language in the Lisp family .... I think you see the issue.
I thought it was clear that I was referring to the specific implementation which died with Lisp 1.5.
Because "Raku" refers to a specific implementation name in the Raku-like languages, of which Perl 6 is one. And the Raku evangelist seems to argue that it was incorrect to describe a Raku evangelist as "a Perl 6" evangelist.
I was drawing a parallel. If a modern Lisp system can be referred to as a Lisp, then why can't Raku be referred to as a Perl 6?
Now, I'm perfectly fine with saying this is a sociological question, and that the members of the group get to decide their name. I also think there are limits to that framework. For one, it leads to gatekeeping. If a Scheme or Clojure users says they are using a language in the Lisp family .... I think you see the issue.