Re: Source package names for R libraries (and Perl, Python, Java, …).
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 09:29:13PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Maybe the best we can do is to set good precedence for the next 100
> programming languages to come. Looking at some examples I find:
> * Haskell: Almost exclusively haskell-foo
> * OCaml: A mix of ocaml-foo, ocamlfoo and some foo (even generic
> names such as why or calendar).
> * Perl: Mostly libfoo-perl
> * Lisp: Mostly cl-foo
> * Ruby: Some libfoo-ruby, some ruby-foo
> * Java: About have are non-generic upstream names, other half are
> Counting ruby for both, there the vote is 4 to 3 between lang-foo and
Except that the reason you find ruby in both is that it's transitioning
from libfoo-ruby to ruby-foo. So it's 4 to 2, really.
The volume of a pizza of thickness a and radius z can be described by
the following formula:
pi zz a