Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Y (programming language): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Enric Naval (talk | contribs) →Y (programming language): also note that comment was copy/pasted in other nominations |
Throwaway85 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 42:
:::These other papers you list here not authored by him, but they seem to be about peephole optimization. This would warrant at most its inclusion in [[Peephole optimization]]. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 21:28, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
::::The papers themselves mention the use of Y, if not particular aspects of the programming language. The spec is enough to describe syntax and semantics, as well as defining features of the language, as it is ''the'' definitive source on those aspects. The papers mentioning the use of the language in various types of optimization research are sufficient to write authoritatively on its uses. While, in general, we don't rely on primary sources for an overview of the subject, the spec is more than sufficient for this purpose, as it ''defines'' particular noteworthy aspects of the language. In the same way, the writings of a philosopher are themselves sufficient to describe a particular theory, while references to that theory are necessary to determine if it is noteworthy. I believe the secondary sources I have found, as well as the others out there, are sufficient to establish Y as notable, without needing to be relied upon to describe the language itself. [[User:Throwaway85|Throwaway85]] ([[User talk:Throwaway85|talk]]) 23:57, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - Per Ubernostrum very wise words.--[[User:BabbaQ|BabbaQ]] ([[User talk:BabbaQ|talk]]) 14:43, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
:*Your comment is not very helpful. Could you please address the reasons for deletion instead of complaining about deletion sprees? --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 15:20, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
| |||