Category talk:Omega

From Rosetta Code

Omega vs Ωmega

Conveniently, the languages have slightly different names (Name encodings? Is there really a difference?), so this could be disambiguated simply by setting up Category:Ωmega as a different language.

Otherwise, (and these are just some thoughts) regarding different languages with the same name, we are going to need to address it eventually. If Ωmega were named Omega, then the distinction could be made by language creation year (e.g. Category:Omega (1990) and Category:Omega (2008). If they had the same creation year, then you could distinguish them by creator origin (either organization or individual). Unless a particular distinguishing feature of the language is a hard, fast design point, I would refrain from using a language feature as the distinguishing characteristic. If they stem from a common base (either code or standard), then one could distinguish them by source-control revision identifier or by standard. I'm disinclined to suggest identification by PR version number (i.e. PHP 4 vs PHP 5), as individual PR version numbers continue to go through changes. (PHP 4 and PHP 5, as development lines, still see individual changes.) Relying on PR version numbers thus seems unnecessarily confusing in a broader comparison context, but I can't offer a sound logical argument as to why it's any more or less so than some of the other things we do. (Yes, I realize we already distinguish between Perl 5 and Perl 6, and I expect we'll probably do the same for Python 2 and Python 3) --Michael Mol 16:04, 23 June 2010 (UTC)