I'm working on modernizing Rosetta Code's infrastructure. Starting with communications. Please accept this time-limited open invite to RC's Slack.. --Michael Mol (talk) 20:59, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Specification Languages

From Rosetta Code
Specification Languages
This is a particular discussion thread among many which consider Rosetta Code.

Summary

What languages can be included in Rosetta Code?

Discussion

I was wondering if RC is strictly about programming languages or whether specification languages could be interesting, too? More specifically, I'm thinking of specification languages that allow to "solve" their models, i.e. create example instantiations automatically. Those languages are relatively well-suited to implement logic puzzles like Zebra puzzle. Some of these languages have pretty interesting semantics and syntax, for example Alloy.

So, is it programming languages only, or do we tolerate languages that are only "somewhat executable"? - Wmeyer (talk) 14:51, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, reading wp:Specification language, I found:
Specifications must be subject to a process of refinement (the filling-in of implementation detail) before they can actually be implemented. The result of such a refinement process is an executable algorithm, which is either formulated in a programming language, or in an executable subset of the specification language at hand.
Then it should be OK to give examples written in an executable subset of such specification languages if one exists otherwise I would think that if it cannot be executed then it would not be suitable for comparison with other examples. Maybe the un-refined and refined to an executable could be given, but if the executable source is in another language then that may cause issues with the normal tasks example headers. --Paddy3118 (talk) 16:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)