Content deleted Content added
Hervegirod (talk | contribs) |
Hervegirod (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 199:
::(not sure what/who the above comment is aimed at but here goes) No, it is not obvious that a language with more features is "superior" (as you out it). The objective of this article is not to pass judgement on which is superior. You are setting up a straw-man argument. A wikipedia article is about verifiable facts. This article should only under exceptional circumstances label anything as a "deficiency" - and should only do so if there are ample authoritative sources for such a claim. Whether a language supports a specific (or equivalent) feature, or even how it supports a given programming discipline (functional programming, dynamic programs, object oriented programs, numeric or financial applications etc) can be demonstrated by careful examples. However, turning the article into a survey or synthesis of how the languages are actually used would violate WP:NOR. That said, I'm all for creating a more ''discipline'' oriented article (as opposed to a feature-oriented article). It is, however, very difficult to do so without introducing original research. [[User:Useerup|Useerup]] ([[User talk:Useerup|talk]]) 17:40, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
::: I'm concerned that this article contains really a lot of original research, which is maybe inevitable considering the amount of content in it. But I think it has much too many content for its subject. Sticking to valid sources would reduce its content, but improve its quality (and be in line with Wikipedia rules BTW). For now even for programmers its very difficult to read. [[User:Hervegirod|Hervegirod]] ([[User talk:Hervegirod|talk]]) 21:41, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
| |||