Content deleted Content added
Tag: |
|||
| (21 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{Old afd|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Stub|
|}▼
{{WikiProject Computing|importance=|software=yes}}
== Python and Logo ==
Given Python's features and it's many bindings (GL, Gnome and KDE to name a few), I think it's a bad example. [[Logo programming language|Logo]] however, would be a good example because it can only be used to draw things with. [[KTurtle]] is a [[FLOSS|free]] implementation of it, and allows the programmer to draw lines with a turtle. Good for educating children the very basics of coding.
*I agree with you and also think Logo would be a better example. I'm changing that right now. However, I've also seen Python and Javascript been mentioned as "very high level". I actually think it's a misnamer and I'm going to mention it in the article. [[User:Sarg|Sarg]] 21:12, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Line 28 ⟶ 32:
:::The LSM2003 link specifically mentions scheme and lisp. "The first ref" contains VHLL in its title. The first (at the time you wrote) LSM ref (2004 preceedings) had a subtitle specifically indicating it was the VHLL track of that meeting (I have since added that to the ref in the article). I also added a ref to that same meeting from a lisp users' wiki, which indicates that there was a VHLL track that did discuss lisp. [[User:DMacks|DMacks]] 03:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
::::I mean that in this reference [http://www-jcsu.jesus.cam.ac.uk/~csr21/papers/lightning/lightning.html], I don't see any relation to VHLL except the ''title'' of the lightning talk track! The talks are all about Lisp/Scheme internals. I was hoping for something meatier, that would help differentiate between a so-called VHLL and a high-level language. --[[User:IanOsgood|IanOsgood]] 17:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
:::::The ref was added to illustrate modern usage of the term and as a continuation of its 1970s meaning, as per your request. Now you're asking for something somewhat different. That ref is not a public forum discussing the topic or a high-level introduction to the field itself, but addresses specific lower-level issues. By listing talks under the heading of VHLL, that means the topics of those talks are VHLLish, no? [[User:DMacks|DMacks]] 18:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
== Propietary? ==
Usually proprietary? To me that means a majority of the time, and by such a margin that encountering the other case would be odd. Without numbers, it's just something some guy said.
Why mention proprietary status at all? It sticks out like a sore thumb when the low-level and high-level articles are about the '''technical''' aspects of how a language is implemented or programs in it are coded. Does Python become lower-level when the updates to the source code are released? <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/69.143.68.115|69.143.68.115]] ([[User talk:69.143.68.115|talk]]) 23:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
== BASIC ==
Isn't [[BASIC]] a VHLPL?--[[User:82.29.80.122|82.29.80.122]] 15:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
== Contradiction in Examples ==
From the article - "Very high-level programming languages are usually limited to a very specific application, purpose, or type of task." Then it goes on to list Python, Ruby, and Scheme as examples. I feel this is a contradiction. The three languages given as examples are general purpose programming languages with an extremely broad range of applications. I'm not sure which is the intended meaning of the term so I can't say whether the examples are okay and the leading statement is inaccurate, or if the examples are bad. From the references I checked, (but I did not go into deep detail) it appears that the examples are good and the notion that they are limited in scope is inaccurate. [[Special:Contributions/216.36.186.2|216.36.186.2]] ([[User talk:216.36.186.2|talk]]) 19:07, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
== Domain-specific language vs high-level language ==
If "higher level" refers to the level of abstraction, then the more abstract a language the more it provides operations found in the conceptual roots of mathematics. For example: [[lisp (programming language)|lisp]], [[scheme (programming language)|scheme]] and [[haskell]] provide operations from [[lambda calculus]]; [[prolog]] and [[answer set programming]] provide operations from [[first order logic]]; [[occam programming language|occam]] provides operations from [[communicating sequential processes]] which is related to [[recursion theory]].
On the other hand, when a language becomes specific to a particular ___domain, such as the Business Definition Language cited in the article, it becomes a [[___domain-specific language]].
Now if only I could find a reference... [[User:Pgr94|pgr94]] ([[User talk:Pgr94|talk]]) 18:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
== No examples? ==
From this talk page I gather that all examples for VHLLs were deleted for lack of consensus. If there's no agreement, the article could at least say what languages are considered a VHLL by some people and why, and why others disagree. In its current state the article could as well be deleted because it leaves the reader absolutely clueless. Or are all VHLLs so Domain Specific that nobody's ever heard of them except their single developer-user?--[[Special:Contributions/88.73.1.202|88.73.1.202]] ([[User talk:88.73.1.202|talk]]) 14:40, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
-----
I'm going to pipe in with some examples that I think relevant. Leopard Programming Language, AutoHotkey (but not Autoit, basic-like syntax), DOS Batch files, Ren'Py (there are many others of this type). According to what I am reading ("usually limited to a very specific application, purpose, or type of task,and often scripting languages"; "they might use syntax that is never used in other programming languages, such as direct English syntax") there is an ease of use to the language, syntax that professional developers might find offensive but non-programmers useful and can build _targeted_ _solutions_ quickly (but aren't suited for general programming). Sorry if my post doesn't meet the guidelines here, not sure how to use the talk system. [[User:Paxdomine|Paxdomine]] ([[User talk:Paxdomine|talk]]) 18:04, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
This article is unclear. Does VHLL mean its original definition, namely a language usable by non-programmers, in other words a 4GL, or declarative language, such as SQL? Or is it a language having high orders of abstraction, such as Scheme? Or does it mean what HLL or 3GL used to mean, e.g. Python? And who decides on the definition?
Note that VHLL was used mainly in the 1980s, so the original definition is the most appropriate.
[[User:Jonw2|Jonw2]] ([[User talk:Jonw2|talk]]) 14:55, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
== GPT has transformed actual human language into a "very high-level programming language" ==
Much like what pseudo-code-approaching languages have almost (seemingly) tried to achieve, a coding-oriented AI can now take natural language instructions to generate code, i.e. a programmer productivity tool. If this seems half-baked to anyone, consider tokens and combinations thereof as actual lexical tokens, the composition of which will trigger deterministically set computer instructions. Perhaps this deserves insertion or at least consideration. [[Special:Contributions/90.132.212.6|90.132.212.6]] ([[User talk:90.132.212.6|talk]]) 09:52, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
| |||