|
Is this language at all notable? [[User Talk:Stevage|Stevage]] 15:17, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
:No less notable than [[List_of_vehicles_in_The_Simpsons|List of vehicles in the Simpsons]] or a thousand other topics here. It's had far more development and practical application than the Joy language, let alone [[Brainfuck]]. [[User:67.98.226.12|67.98.226.12]] 23:23, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Except that hundreds of millions of people know the Simpsons, and billions of people know what a vehicle is.--[[User:Congruence|Congruence]] ([[User talk:Congruence|talk]]) 17:13, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
[[User:Ceran|Ceran]] 18:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)Aside from answering the eternal question "What would Lisp look like backwards?", no, this language isn't very notable. That said, the previous commenter makes a good point in that there are articles on far less note-worthy topics. More importantly (and surprisingly), it still appears to be under active development. As of today, the author is making regular updates to his blog at http://factor-language.blogspot.com/. So who knows, maybe this boring love-child of Lisp and Forth might actually become useful.
::It is a actively developed language with practical work beinng done. [[User:Shabda|Shabda]] 06:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
::I don't see how you can say that it is not a notable language. You can find references and discussions (usually in very favorable lights) on popular language discussion sites such as Lambda the Ultimate and Reddit. The language is quite easy to learn and use, and has many very practical libraries which are distributed with the language itself.[[User:Gmh33|Gmh33]] 20:02, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
The notability of Factor can be pretty well established by the fact that it's in the top fifty programming communities according to the Tiobe index. [http://www.tiobe.com/index.htm?tiobe_index] --[[User:Fubar Obfusco|FOo]] ([[User talk:Fubar Obfusco|talk]]) 06:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Are you kidding? That index measures marketing success, not programming language seriousness. Come on, it doesn't even mention Ocaml! If Factor appears there, it's only because its author is spending time submitting posts about it to social bookmarking sites. Apparently he does a very good job of marketing his uninteresting Forth clone. A better criteria would be to check Debian packages to see if there is anything written in factor. Not!--[[User:Congruence|Congruence]] ([[User talk:Congruence|talk]]) 17:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
==Interpreted language?==
Quote: "Factor was originally only interpreted, but it can now also be compiled. The compiler is written entirely in Factor, and it does not output standalone executables but rather merely a faster image."
| 