Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Programming languages: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 21:03, 29 August 2004

Revision as of 03:52, 30 August 2004

Line 214:

:Um yeah, that's a bit confused, because the above is ''trivially true'' (thanks to stuff to do with [[turing machine]]s). In real life though, it is often only ''practical'' to use a language within certain parameters. Those can certainly be named. I excised the section because it would take longer to explain all the ifs and buts and perhapses etc etc. than it would be to just be quiet about it and let things sort themselves out. I hope that explains sufficiently! :-) [[User:Kim Bruning|Kim Bruning]] 21:03, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

::The distinction between languages and implementations is still worth making though; a language article should have a sentence or two in the lead stating implementation status (one, many, none :-) ), and a section summarizing notable existing implementations, possibly with a list of links to the article-worthy. It's hard to imagine a credible PL writeup that doesn't have this kind of basic info, so I think it should be part of the requirement to have a project-conforming article. Conversely, a PL article should '''not''' say that a language is "interpreted" or "compiled", since it is a property of implementations not languages - my little title-hacking project has given me a change to observe the terrible state of PL content firsthand, and lots of articles are messed up this way. [[User:Stan Shebs|Stan]] 03:52, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)