Differences between version 21 and previous revision of ProgrammingLanguage.
Other diffs: Previous Major Revision, Previous Author, or view the Annotated Edit History
| Newer page: | version 21 | Last edited on Wednesday, November 19, 2003 6:18:48 pm | by AristotlePagaltzis | Revert |
| Older page: | version 20 | Last edited on Wednesday, November 19, 2003 4:59:09 pm | by AristotlePagaltzis | Revert |
@@ -1,27 +1,23 @@
-!!! ''This page
is currently a mess while a
great refactoring
is rippling throughout programming language related pages
in the wiki
.''
+;: If the Tao
is great, then the operating system
is great. If the operating system is great, then the compiler is great. If the compiler is great, then the application is great. The user is pleased and there is harmony
in the world
. %%% %%% [[...] %%% %%% The Tao gave birth to machine language. Machine language gave birth to the assembler. The assembler gave birth to the compiler. Now there are ten thousand languages. %%% %%% Each language has its purpose, however humble. Each language expresses the Yin and Yang of software. Each language has its place within the Tao. %%% %%% But do not program in COBOL if you can avoid it. %%% %%% -- ''Geoffrey James
'', The Tao of Programming
-All descriptions should be merged from here into the respective
language's page
. The lists should
be replaced with category backlinks. The category pages need not (really) exist (only as helpers). All generic descriptions
of categories and their respective backlink lists will be here on this page
. --AristotlePagaltzis
+A human-readable
language to control computers
. SourceCode written in a ProgrammingLanguage may either
be compiled into a [BinaryExecutable] or [ByteCode] by a [Compiler] or executed directly by means
of an Interpreter
.
-----
+!!! Very high level general purpose languages
-;: If the Tao is great, then the operating system is great. If the operating system is great, then the compiler is great. If the compiler is great, then the application is great. The user is pleased and there is harmony in the world. %%% %%% [[...] %%% %%% The Tao gave birth to machine language. Machine language gave birth to the assembler. The assembler gave birth to the compiler. Now there are ten thousand languages. %%% %%% Each language has its purpose, however humble. Each language expresses the Yin and Yang of software. Each language has its place within the Tao. %%% %%% But do not program in COBOL if you can avoid it. %%% %%% -- ''Geoffrey James'', The Tao of Programming
-
-A human-readable language to control computers. SourceCode written in a ProgrammingLanguage is commonly compiled into a [BinaryExecutable] or [ByteCode] by a [Compiler], but it may be [interpreted|InterpretedLanguages].
+<?plugin BackLinks page=CategoryVeryHighLevelProgrammingLanguages noheader=1 ?>
-__
Machine Oriented General Purpose__: [C++], [Java], [Pascal]
+!!!
Machine oriented general purpose languages
-[BASIC] [COBOL] [Fortran]
+<?plugin BackLinks page=CategoryMachineOrientedProgrammingLanguages noheader=1 ?>
!!! Systems programming languages
-These languages are designed for low-level software: drivers, OperatingSystems, game engines, any code that has to go really fast. They tend to be simplistic languages that closely follow the VonNeumannArchitecture
[CPU]s are based on which allows skilled programmers to predict and control exactly how their code will be executed.
+These languages are designed for low-level software: drivers, OperatingSystems, game engines, any code that has to go really fast. They tend to be simplistic languages that closely follow the [VonNeumann | JohnVonNeumann] architecture
[CPU]s are based on which allows skilled programmers to predict and control exactly how their code will be executed.
-Strangely, to date they tend to be very "unsafe" languages too. In code written in [C], the SystemsProgrammingLanguage for [Unix], it's easy to introduce tiny bugs that mysteriously screw everthing up from time to time -- not something you want your OperatingSystem to do.
+<?plugin BackLinks page=CategorySystemsProgrammingLanguages noheader=1 ?>
-If you want
to see an alternative approach
to systems programming
languages examine
[Modula2].
-
-<?plugin BackLinks page=CategorySystemsProgrammingLanguages noheader=1 ?>
+Strangely,
to date they tend
to be very "unsafe"
languages too. In code written in [C], the SystemsProgrammingLanguage for [Unix], it's easy to introduce tiny bugs that mysteriously screw everthing up from time to time -- not something you want your OperatingSystem to do.
[Modula2] is the exception to this rule
.
!!! Imperative programming languages
<?plugin BackLinks page=CategoryImperativeProgrammingLanguages noheader=1 ?>
@@ -31,31 +27,31 @@
Functional programming is a __paradigm__ based loosely on the LambdaCalculus approach to ComputerScience, in which everything in a program is a function.
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 shortcircuiting their execution by looking up the return value of a previous call to a computationally expensive function for the same set of arguments in a cache. It also allows the computer to execute all parts of the program in arbitrary order to arrive and the desired result.
-For examples of functional [ProgrammingLanguage] see Category:FunctionalProgrammingLanguages.
+<?plugin BackLinks page=CategoryFunctionalProgrammingLanguages noheader=1 ?>
Programmers generally prefer imperative programming as they find it easier to understand and build practical applications with. Indeed, some things that depend on side effects and are easy in imperative programming are unreasonably hard to solve in pure functional programming - I/O is an example. However, problems that may seem terribly difficult in imperative programming are often trivial in pure functional programming.
It has been theorised this preference for imperative programming is a result of most people learning imperative programming languages ([C++], [BASIC], [Java] etc). If they even learn functional programming at all, it is usually much later and in much less depth, so they never really learn to think like a functional programmer. Perhaps if more programmers were taught to think in a functional style from their infancy we would see more applications written in functional languages.
-<?plugin BackLinks page=CategoryFunctionalProgrammingLanguages noheader=1 ?>
+!!! Object oriented programming languages
-!!! Object oriented
programming languages
+As that page, 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. The following
languages are ones which do support this style directly:
<?plugin BackLinks page=CategoryObjectOrientedProgrammingLanguages noheader=1 ?>
-!!! Obfuscated programming
languages
+!!! Obfuscated languages
-These languages are not intended to be used for serious work, but to stretch the brain. You might also be interested in PolyGlot
.
+These languages are not intended to be used for serious work, but to stretch the brain.
<?plugin BackLinks page=CategoryObfuscatedProgrammingLanguages noheader=1 ?>
-----
+You might also be interested in PolyGlot.
-!!! Very High Level General Purpose
+!!! Special purpose languages
-; [Python] : This is a good language to learn if you only program occasionally out of necessity. (E.g. if you are a WebMonkey who needs do odd things with text, [XML] and structured data every now and then.) Those who like it find Python code unusually easy to read, which is good if you are returning to a script you wrote 3 months ago; and it has a very complete standard library, so you don't have to start from scratch when working on common tasks. It's use of indentation as the only means of structuring source is not appreciated by everyone, though.
+<?plugin BackLinks page=CategorySpecialPurposeProgrammingLanguages noheader=1 ?>
-!!! Special purpose programming
languages
+!!! Deprecated
languages
-<?plugin BackLinks page=SpecialPurposeProgrammingLanguages
noheader=1 ?>
+<?plugin BackLinks page=CategoryDeprecatedProgrammingLanguages
noheader=1 ?>
