I agree that it seems wrong to change the name of an already established
language. However, I also don't like the fact that something with the name
"Brainfuck" comes with the core of parrot. What if we moved its
distribution out of CVS and just put it on the webpage, or something of that
nature?
Tanton
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brent Dax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Andy Dougherty'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 1:26 AM
Subject: RE: [perl #18566] [PATCH]
> Andy Dougherty:
> # On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, Leon Brocard wrote:
> #
> # > ps You might be concerned about the name. Well, CPAN has a module
> # > which matches /fuck/ too. However, if everyone really thinks
> # > it is a problem, I don't see a problem with s/fuck/funk/g
> #
> # Well, I'll speak up. I find the name needlessly crude and
> # offensive. I see no reason to use such a name and would
> # strongly prefer that Parrot didn't. Parrot is a collective
> # project representing a community of developers, and I, for
> # one, don't wish to be associated with needlessly crude and
> # offesnsive language.
>
> Since this thread has resurfaced, I'll speak up too. And my
> not-so-humble opinion is: It's just a word--get over it.
>
> Generally, I try to avoid these words in mixed company, since other
> people dislike them, sometimes very strongly. But in this case,
> Brainfuck already has an established name. We should use it, even if a
> couple people won't understand that it wasn't our idea to call it that.
>
> --Brent Dax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> @roles=map {"Parrot $_"} qw(embedding regexen Configure)
>
> "If you want to propagate an outrageously evil idea, your conclusion
> must be brazenly clear, but your proof unintelligible."
> --Ayn Rand, explaining how today's philosophies came to be
>
>
>
