Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
reply →Language Versions: , new section on changing inclusion criteria |
||
Line 101:
I was wondering what the consistency between updates to languages is? For example, all the changes to C and C++ seem to be listed as separate entries, but even major changes to other languages, such as Python 2 to Python 3, or Java 1.4 to Java 5 don't seem to be treated in the same way. [[Special:Contributions/2A00:23C4:4EA8:1801:5050:740F:833E:891B|2A00:23C4:4EA8:1801:5050:740F:833E:891B]] ([[User talk:2A00:23C4:4EA8:1801:5050:740F:833E:891B|talk]]) 15:14, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
: I think entries for Python 3 and Java 5 could be listed. I'm not sure of the exact inclusion criteria, see next section --[[User:Mathnerd314159|Mathnerd314159]] ([[User talk:Mathnerd314159|talk]]) 03:34, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
== Changing criteria to notability ==
"Historically significant" is hard to prove and the inclusion criteria the list actually uses seems different, for example C99 is not particularly historically relevant as for the most part it just copied features from C++. What does everyone think about changing the criteria to ''notable'' programming languages? Notability is easy to verify compared to historical significance. I don't think the table will grow too much due to this change but if it does we can just split the table across several pages. --[[User:Mathnerd314159|Mathnerd314159]] ([[User talk:Mathnerd314159|talk]]) 03:34, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
| |||