+These languages make no attempt to conceal the MachineCode's view of their data structures. Simple data types are directly derived from those the [CPU ] supports , and the memory layout of complex data structures is usually known to the programmer. As the predominant [CPU ] architecture is the [VonNeumann | JohnVonNeumann] architecture , they all follow its principles as well. They're also all imperative languages. Sometimes called "glorified [AssemblyLanguage]", it is generally the point of such languages to be compiled . 

+These languages are designed for low-level software: drivers, [OperatingSystem]s , game engines, any code that has to go really fast. They are necessarily compiled machine oriented languages and allow quite precise control of the resulting MachineCode . 

+Code in these languages is a series of instructions for ''how '' the computer does its work (as opposed to functional languages where the computer figures out the sequence of instructions and declarative languages where the computer is only given facts and figures out everything for itself). Most widely adopted languages fall in this category, even if they're not explicitly listed here . 

+In pure functional programming, there are no side effects; you cannot assign a value to a variable more than once, only return values from functions. Therefor, a function's return value depends only on the parameters passed. As a result, you can even mathematically prove the correctness of a program. You can also easily "memoize" functions, ie shortcircuit their execution by look up in a cache the return value of a previous call to a computationally expensive function for the same set of arguments. Purely functional programming also allows the computer to execute all parts of the program in arbitrary order to arrive at the desired result by using LazyEvaluation and PartialEvaluation . 

+As that page mentions , ObjectOrientation is mostly a style and only to an extent a paradigm of programming, and so need not be supported by a ProgrammingLanguage to write programs in object oriented fashion. Although applicable to any language, ObjectOrientation tends to be used to make modularization and code reuse easier mainly in imperative languages which inevitably suffer from a lack of complexity management mechanisms . The following languages are ones which do support this style directly: 

+These languages are not intended to be used for serious work, but to stretch the brain. They attempt to make programming difficult at least by making code very hard to read, sometimes also hard to write . 

+As the name implies, these languages apply mostly to a very small problem domain for which they are offer powerful abstractions. While often even turing complete , they are not intended to be used as general purpose languages. Trying to coerce them into such a role almost invariably results in impossibly unreadable code . 

+Don't learn these unless your idea of fun is something like stabbing yourself in the eyeball with a fork repeatedly. Or if you are in bad need for money, because some of them that were implementation languages of choice in certain areas in the past have left behind a large legacy of code written in them that needs to be maintained . (Some programmers would still consider selling their body sooner than working in these languages.)