Content deleted Content added
m Reverted 1 edit by 164.160.116.115 (talk) to last revision by Theaceofthespade |
m irrelevant to topic. Undid revision 1306363655 by 2409:40E7:65:A69B:8000:0:0:0 (talk) |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 362:
I'm open to any feedback/discussion on this - I'm relatively new to editing here, but this is my field and I am happy to elaborate on or support anything that seems subjective/biased (or just own if its a bias ). I really think this would both represent these viewpoints more clearly, and contextualize why people might have differing ones "in the wild" [[User:Theaceofthespade|Theaceofthespade]] ([[User talk:Theaceofthespade|talk]]) 18:28, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
== A programming language is for writing programs ==
WRT "A programming language is a system of notation for writing computer programs."
Natural language is writing books. ...And a whole lot of other stuff.
Also, it's not just about writing. I could ''generate'' and that's not what I'd call writing. So, maybe 'authoring' is better word.
Thing is, it's not wrong but it's not accurate and it's grandiose. I can use a programming language to write a fragment or code that's never compiled into a program or compiled into a library. A language defines the rules for writing source code. Maybe less sexy, but that's all it is. If you love the 'notation' word, then: a programming language is notational system for encoding the control of a computer. [[User:Stevebroshar|Stevebroshar]] ([[User talk:Stevebroshar|talk]]) 02:12, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
== An implementation of a programming language ==
WRT "An implementation of a programming language is required in order to execute programs"
A compiler/interpreter is not an 'implementation' of a language. A compiler/interpreter understands and conforms to a language. [[User:Stevebroshar|Stevebroshar]] ([[User talk:Stevebroshar|talk]]) 02:18, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
| |||