Not at all.
Haskell, GHC, hackage/cabal/whatever -- intentionally confusing? No, they are different things.
Same in the Raku case: Raku is the language, Rakudo a compiler, and Rakudo Star a distribution (with compiler, docs, module installer etc.)
Giving three different things the same name would be much more confusing.
Those are all completely different words though... that's my point - that's the sensible way to do it.
> Raku is the language, Rakudo a compiler, and Rakudo Star a distribution
These all start with Raku. Can you understand how they'd be easy to mix up, rather than using different words like in the previous example?
> Giving three different things the same name would be much more confusing.
You've got the wrong end of the stick. I think they should have different names. I think at the moment their names are too similar.
Raku is the language.
Rakudo = Raku “Do”
Rakudo Star = Rakudo* (i.e rakudo, rakudo-devel, rakudo-doc,…)
It has more linguistic cohesion that the tooling of a lot of languages.
Java, javac, java* seems totally normal. I feel like it’s because “Raku” sounds alien and so you don’t read Raku-do you read Rakudo because Raku “isn’t a word”.
But that's the problem! I don't want clever, witty, whimsical. I want clear, simple, precise.
This is what went seriously wrong with Perl. In the 90s when Perl was doing well it was fashionable to be wacky like this. Then around 2000 the fashion suddenly changed and the industry grew up and people started to take things more seriously. Now Perl looks terribly out of date and silly.
Really?
Goofy codenames for projects (Bionic Beaver, etc), the sign of a 'serious' project is having a cartoon mascot, 'open source' people relying on closed/proprietary things like slack, macOS, etc. instead of open/libre alternatives, 1 page github READMEs and API docs as 'documentation' but having a youtube channel full of 'howto' videos instead
there is probably an equal amount of goofyness/immaturity and seriousness then as now - it just manifests differently
The programming language industry, yes. There was a marked shift towards simplicity away from silly whimsy. The extreme example is Go.
Personally, I'm happy that we live in a time where we have many different languages featuring meny different paradigms; I find it refreshing and stimulating.
I'm not in charge of what language the Perl projects choose to use.
> Personally, I'm happy that we live in a time where we have many different languages featuring meny different paradigms
You're not arguing against what anyone in this thread said.
“Raku” is the anglicized form of “楽”, which means “easy”. (It is also a form of pottery.)
“Rakuda do” is supposed to be “way of the camel”.
“Rakudo” is “Rakuda do” but shortened/portmanteau.
“Rakudo” is also supposed to mean “paradise”.
---
I want to know how “easy” and “paradise” are not considered different words.
And “Rakudo Star” is the “Rakudo” compiler combined with a bunch of useful modules. So it makes a lot of sense for it to contain “Rakudo”, because it does indeed include “Rakudo”.
---
It also makes a certain amount of sense that “Rakudo” is a thing which you use to “do” "Raku".
No different than "Perl 6" being a different thing from "Perl 5".