Talk:Generational list of programming languages: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:57, 10 December 2003

Latest revision as of 09:41, 2 February 2024

(36 intermediate revisions by 24 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=List|

{{WikiProject Computing|importance=NA}}

}}

==Multiple inheritance==

Why is C# listed as a derivative of C, but Java is not? The whole premise of this list, i.e. that languages form a simple tree is a bit suspect. [[User:2988|0xBAC]] 06:56, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)

An interesting idea, but I agree a tree is suspect-- &mdash;I think you can so <!-- sic --> a tree of principal influences and pointers to other. But where is Smalltalk? Where is Prolog? RPL? If we have VBScript, why not Javascript. What about Perl, PHP. Isn't SQL a language, other 4GLs. What about shell scripts- TeX- assemblers?

There are languages that, arguably, are created specifically in an attempt to "merge" the outstanding characteristics of two other languages. [[J programming language|J]] is a good example: if one didn't knew that [[APL]] was also created by [[Iverson]], it would be hard to say whether J is influenced more by APL than [[Backus]]'s FP/FL or viceversa. I ended up listing it under both and making a referential note. Sure enough, if this technique were to be missused , the Generational list would end up being a Generational mesh ;-) --Danakil

:Indeed&mdash;the concept of ''multiple inheritance'' is rampant, here :-). [[Rexx]], for example, has a strong syntactic resemblance to [[PL/I]], with symbolic concepts adapted from [[BASIC]] and the PL/I macro processor, and many semantic aspects (few limits and system interfaces in particular) taken from [[EXEC 2]]. [[User:Mfc|mfc]]

:Err, maybe I'm reading something wrong, but shouldn't [[NGL]] be under [[J]] instead of [[K]]? [[User:Egregius|Egregius]]

Worse: why is C# listed under C at all? There are trivial syntax differences between C# and Java, whereas there are major conceptual differences between C# and C. For example, C# is all-garbage collected; C is not, but Java is. C# compiles (normally) to a byte code; C does not, but Java does (generally). C# does not support RAII (because the 'finalizers' aren't called at any particular time); C does and Java does not.

An interesting idea, but I agree a tree is suspect-- I think you can so a tree of principal influences and pointers to other. But where is Smalltalk? Where is Prolog? RPL? If we have VBScript, why not Javascript. What about Perl, PHP. Isn't SQL a language, other 4GLs. What about shell scripts- TeX- assemblers?

While there is a resemblance to Java, C#'s reserved words and operators pretty much match C++. And, given Anders Hejlsberg's work in development of Turbo Pascal and Delphi, C# probably has as much cause to be in the ALGOL/Pascal/Modula tree as anywhere. Also, call it [[p-code]] or byte-code -- the concept and practice of virtual machines first saw widespread use in the 1970s in [[UCSD Pascal]]'s p-system... Hejlsberg says in {{Citation

| title = Deep Inside C#: An Interview with Microsoft Chief Architect Anders Hejlsberg

| url=http://www.windowsdevcenter.com/pub/a/oreilly/windows/news/hejlsberg_0800.html}} that "In the design of C#, we looked at a lot of languages. We looked at C++, we looked at Java, at Modula 2, C, and we looked at Smalltalk. There are just so many languages that have the same core ideas that we're interested in, such as deep object-orientation, object-simplification, and so on." So, here's another vote for something other than a tree model.

[[User:209.98.143.77|209.98.143.77]] 20:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I think the whole tree format is inherantly flawed for this information. It really needs a graph for multipule parents and cycles. C(99), for example, did take some inspirations from C++(98), which was inspired by C(89).

:Things in real life are not always perfect representations of concepts. This list is great. It should be assumed that ideas spread.[[Special:Contributions/90.134.99.224|90.134.99.224]] ([[User talk:90.134.99.224|talk]]) 14:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

== Concurrent Turing ==

Hi,

There is no such language as Concurrent Turing.

Turing Plus is concurrent, but it has never been called

Concurrent Turing.

Jim Cordy

(co-author of the Turing, Turing Plus and Object-Oriented Turing languages)

== Dialects of BASIC. ==

In the languages that have descended from the [[BASIC programming language|BASIC]] branch of the tree, some of the entries are just [[List of BASIC dialects by platform|BASIC dialects]] (eg. [[QBasic]]) rather than BASIC-derived languages like [[COMAL]]. Should we prune this tree from the BASIC branch and instead start a generational list of BASIC dialects? [[User:Ae-a|Ae-a]] 04:57, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

:I think the dialects are interesting. We should add more, such as Integer BASIC and Applesoft BASIC. Maybe there should be a way to denote that a language is a dialect.[[Special:Contributions/90.134.99.224|90.134.99.224]] ([[User talk:90.134.99.224|talk]]) 13:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

::BASIC is correctly listed under FORTRAN because their original purposes and syntax for mathematical calculations were similar. But implementations have been typically radically different -- all early BASICs were interpreted; FORTRAN has always been compiled. Fair enough; but Perl was originally writtent to combine the capabilities of ksh and awk, while adding some of Larry Wall's ideas (correct, it turns out) as to what would be useful. Perl is apparently listed under C simply because it uses curly brackets to mark logical blocks of code, but this seems a rather shallow criterion. Why not under BASIC, since both use $ as a variable marker (though BASIC only for strings, and it's a suffix) and both are interpreted? This attempt to shoehorn computer languages into a strict genealogy tree seems strained and arbitrary in many respects. (Why is Modula-2 an independent branch of ALGOL instead of a descendent of Pascal? Is ADA related to Pascal or Modula? etc. etc. etc.) -- Craig Goodrich [[Special:Contributions/24.14.168.244|24.14.168.244]] ([[User talk:24.14.168.244|talk]]) 00:36, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

== Simula and ALGOL 60 ==

Shouldn't [[Simula]] be listed under [[ALGOL 60]]? [[User:Kaldari|Kaldari]] 07:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

==isn't perl a derivitive of Pascal?==

IO recantly read that perl was derivided from pascal (was derived from ALGOL) but here its listed as a from C? [[User:Oxinabox|Oxinabox]] ([[User talk:Oxinabox|talk]]) 01:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

==Visual Basic==

Visual Basic is much more rememincient of C++, than of original BASIC. even in some syntax.

It my have evolved from BASIC, folllowing Microsoft's quick basic, - visual basic 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 line.

but by the time VB^ comes around it's been so heavily influenced by C++.

DOn't know what should be done, Maybe a cross reference in the tree? [[User:Oxinabox|Oxinabox]] ([[User talk:Oxinabox|talk]]) 01:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

:Mmmpf. I took a look at T-SQL recently (on a dare) and have come to the conclusion that in Redmond's damp climate, all languages rot into a form of Visual Basic in three years or less. -- Craig Goodrich [[Special:Contributions/24.14.168.244|24.14.168.244]] ([[User talk:24.14.168.244|talk]]) 00:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

== -based or -influenced ==

The list is organized by which language a given language was based upon. How about saying a given language was influenced by a language rather than based upon it?[[Special:Contributions/90.134.106.50|90.134.106.50]] ([[User talk:90.134.106.50|talk]]) 15:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

== Others ==

Is [[Scala (programming language)]] missing? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/99.162.208.204|99.162.208.204]] ([[User talk:99.162.208.204|talk]]) 23:36, 30 June 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Is MATLAB Programming missing ? MATLAB programming supports OOPS and activex server programming too. Is it missing because it is costly? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/65.200.157.177|65.200.157.177]] ([[User talk:65.200.157.177|talk]]) 21:02, 7 October 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Having programmed in both SNOBOL3 and COMIT, I can assure you that they are utterly different in style, syntax, model of the universe, and everything else ''except'' that a) statements were punched into the first 72 columns of a Hollerith card, b) they were both text-processing languages, and c) both are deader than Etruscan. I wrote my first program around 1967 in the basement of the Old Gym at Indiana U in Bloomington, a former basketball court converted to house a CDC-3400/3600 system (the 3400 acted as an input preprocessor for the 3600). So why is SNOBOL shown as a "descendant" of COMIT? -- Craig Goodrich [[Special:Contributions/24.14.168.244|24.14.168.244]] ([[User talk:24.14.168.244|talk]]) 00:05, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Why is [[Mark 1 Autocode ]](the first publicly available high level programming language, a couple of years before Fortran) not on this list? Or the original (Glennie, 1952) Manchester Autocode? They probably ought to be here. [[User:MichealT|MichealT]] ([[User talk:MichealT|talk]]) 14:07, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

== Python is not C=based definetely ==

Python is based on Modula-2/Oberon models, not C.

It should be placed in Pascal family near Lua. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/93.80.71.142|93.80.71.142]] ([[User talk:93.80.71.142|talk]]) 22:19, 8 September 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

python is based on many languages but the syntax is from ABC~fred <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/96.250.190.3|96.250.190.3]] ([[User talk:96.250.190.3|talk]]) 02:07, 5 August 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: Should [[SETL]] (correctly listed as parent of [[ABC (programming language)|ABC]] and grandparent of [[Python (programming language)|Python]]) really be a root? I have always assumed it was strongly influenced by [[ALGOL]]. However I cannot find any mention of this by Jack Schwartz or anyone else involved in the design of the language. --[[User:Finnw|Finnw]] ([[User talk:Finnw|talk]]) 20:09, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

== D is more based on C++ than C ==

It was designed as a replacement for C++ and includes almost all features presented in C++. [[User:Vladislav.kuzkokov|Vladislav.kuzkokov]] ([[User talk:Vladislav.kuzkokov|talk]]) 08:23, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

== Redlinked languages and [[WP:WTAF]]? ==

Should this list be subject to [[WP:WTAF]]? There are a number of redlinks, and more get added over time, although some are removed as well. On [[List of programming languages‎]], for example, the no redlink policy is fairly strictly enforced. I think the policy should apply here, but as it clearly has not been really enforced in some time (if ever), I thought I'd open a discussion before removing them. I've recently removed the redlinks from [[List of programming languages by type]], without objection (and some encouragement from another editor), although the problem was more severe there. [[User:Rwessel|Rwessel]] ([[User talk:Rwessel|talk]]) 07:54, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

*'''Support.''' Go for it. [[WP:BEBOLD]]. [[User:Msnicki|Msnicki]] ([[User talk:Msnicki|talk]]) 08:07, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Done. A summary:

:A variety of redlinks and other items without articles were removed per [[WP:WTAF]].

:'''Today based''' section removed – no primary article, only a stub for the single derived language.

:'''Neat3''' removed – link only

:'''RPG''': link removed, in article

: '''<nowiki>{{reflist}}</nowiki>''' removed (no more references)

[[User:Rwessel|Rwessel]] ([[User talk:Rwessel|talk]]) 20:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)