XL (programming language): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
CanisRufus (talk | contribs)
m dab Java
Line 141:
* [[C_plus_plus|C++]] and the [[Standard template library]] demonstrated the need for good support of generic types, including implicit instantiation of generics (which Ada lacks).
* [[Fortran]]'s continued performance lead over C and C++ for numerical-intensive applications helped identify which language constructs would prevent useful optimizations.
* [[Java programming language|Java]] demonstrated the importance of a large, portable support library. Java containers also showed the limitations of an approach not based on generic programming. Interfacing with Java code remains an interesting challenge for XL.
* [[Lisp_programming_language|Lisp]] extensibility was considered as a key factor in its survival and relevance to this day. Lisp was the first language to normalize object-oriented features, despite having been designed years before object-oriented ideas were invented.
* [[Prolog]] demonstrated that alternative programming models are sometimes useful and highly productive. Every effort was made to ensure that a Prolog-style plug-in could be written for XL.