Content deleted Content added
m →Poor choice of example code: Subst: {{unsigned}} (& regularise templates) |
Grshiplett (talk | contribs) →ICON as a language: new section |
||
Line 415:
:No, I'm confused by the [http://docs.python.org/tutorial/classes.html#generators Python generators definition]. Forget it! [[User:Rursus|Rursus]] dixit. ([[User talk:Rursus|<span style="color: red; background: #FFFF80"><sup>m</sup><u>bork<sup>3</sup></u></span>]]!) 07:33, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
== ICON as a language ==
the article opens by characterizing ICON as a string manipulation language.
I think that if you look at ICON 9.5 this will not seem an appropriate characterization. Was ICON not the first expressly free language (after accidental SNOBOL 'release'? )
ObjectIcon at code.google.com/p/objecticon is surely more than a string manipulation language
ICON is better characterized as a free expression-based language with goal-directed facilities
For ICON for pythonistas, see convergepl.org
G. Robert Shiplett 14:34, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
| |||