If anything, it's a Backronym, which makes its inclusion in your quiz a poor choice. If you must include it, call it what it is, and don't try to make it look like the name Perl was an artifact derived from a chosen longhand phrase.
Which "good university" has documents stating that Perl is intended to be an acronym?
Before you start telling people to refer to Wikipedia or some vague university's "documents", you should RTFM, or in this case, RTFFAQ:
perlfaq1: What is the difference between perl and Perl?. I won't cut-and-paste it here, but you will find that the Perl documentation disputes your assertion.
While you're at it, you can confirm my JAPH comment here: perlfaq1: What is a JAPH?
| [reply] |
Oh yes, thanks again Dave.
Modified it.
I love this site and its users. They are very active and very knowledgeable. Would love to hear more from you people on our contents.
Either you people can contribute your posts as our guest author or can leave comment at Per Forum
and Perl Blogs
| [reply] |
One thing I ought to say, and haven't: While I disagree that a multiple choice Perl quiz to ascertain whether someone has ascended to or past the level of beginner is a "good idea", I commend you on the notion of blogging about Perl.
People of all ability levels who enjoy programming with Perl ought to be shouting that from the rooftops. Once you iron out the kinks, you may want to participate in the Perl Ironman Blog list.
| [reply] |
"Check Wikipedia or any good universities documents. It will be there."
NO!
Not because I care all that much about the specific issue -- whether the name has some specific acronymic meaning, but rather, because you're suggesting that seconday (and very possibly inaccurate) resources should be grounds for ignoring a primary resource, such as Larry Wall's own remarks.
Now, I'll grant that I've not found (in the archives of comp.lang.perl.misc) a statement signed by Wall, nor audio or video of Wall disputing the notion that "perl" or "Perl" is an acronym, nor have I ever had occasion to ask timtoady 'what's the fact?' but the assertions of numerous Perl pioneers (including a good many Monks of Great Tenure; merlyn, tilly (see [Re^5: perl not omnipotent? let's see!), petdance....) are, to me, far more persuasive than sources such as wiki, CS departs at .edus, etc.
Likewise, IMO, the widely reported story that a witty writer invented a backronym to explain his name choice (or as a joke) seems more plausible than that he departed so radically from the common use of
- pedestrian acronyms (COBOL, BASIC, etc.),
- personal initials (awk, for example)
- or personal names with historic CS significance (ADA)
as denominators for computer languages.
| [reply] |