User:Thundergnat

My Favorite Languages
Language	Proficiency
Perl	Moderately Proficient
Perl 6	Still seems like I use it all the time
Raku	Use it all the time

License:

Any code which I have submitted to Rosettacode may be used under the Unlicense.

I would appreciate that any use includes a link back to the Rosettacode page from which it was obtained (but obviously would have no way to enforce that.)

Syntax highlighting and CSS guide

• Short guide to Rosetta Code syntax highlighting and CSS customization that I wrote

Reports I Generate:

• Rank languages by popularity
• List authors of task descriptions
• Count task examples by language: Top 10
• Count task examples by language: 11 - 20
• Count task examples by language: 21 - 30
• Count task examples by language: 31 - 40

Utilities I Wrote:

Tampermonkey or Greasemonkey javascript applets

• Add language parameters to Category task entry links - See this Village Pump page for details. Presently @ version 0.8 (2023/01/22)
• Syntax highlighting toggle Toggle the task syntax highlighting off and on. Presently @ version 0.2 (2022/08/22)

Resources I Host:

• Offsite repository of resource files for various tasks

Language Stats:

As part of my reports I generate weekly (listed above) I have started to collect some statistics on languages that have a large number of entries. (For now, the cut off is 1000.) A sufficiently large number of entries should average out outliers and give at least an reasonable overview of how different languages stack up.

Note that this is purely for my own entertainment and curiosity. I strenuously want to avoid people making efforts to optimize for one metric or another. Many of these are heavily influenced by a particular stylistic choice made by a prolific entry author. None of these are good or bad. Just observations.

Comments aren't filtered out, so entries that have lots of comments will have higher character counts. That isn't a bad thing though. Quite the opposite in fact. The whole point of Rosettacode is to learn how different languages can accomplish the same task. Lots of comments is a good thing.

How the various metrics are calculated / what they mean. Averages are the sum of all of that item in every entry divided by the total number of tasks with an entry, rounded to the nearest integer or percentage.

• Task count - The number of tasks for which there is an entry in that language.
• Average lines per entry - The average number of lines in code blocks per entry. Multiple versions under the same task all count as lines per task. (If there are four versions and each has 25 lines, it counts as 100 for that task.)
• Average number of characters - Average number of characters inside <lang *></lang> blocks per task including whitespace.
• Average whitespace - How many of the above characters are white space? (Including new line characters.)
• Average percent alpha-numerics - What percentage of the non-white space characters are alphabetic or numeric?
• Average percent non-alpha-numerics - What percentage of the non-white space characters are not alphabetic or numeric? (Punctuation, symbols, etc)
• Average percent non-ASCII - What percentage of the non-white space characters are not ASCII characters?
• Syntax highlighting - What syntax highlighter does it use in order from most to least common; the highlighting specifier with how many times it was seen (in parenthesis). Note that some variation is expected, especially for tasks like Call a foreign-language function, Rosetta Code/Find bare lang tags or probably the largest source of oddball markup tags: Rosetta Code/Fix_code_tags. In general, Pygments expects the lexer name to be all lower case.

As of 2022-09-11

Language	Task Count	Avg. # Lines / Entry	Avg. # Characters	Avg. % White space	Avg. % Alphanumerics	Avg. %Non Alphanumerics	Avg. % Non-ASCII	Syntax highlighting
Wren	1571	57	1646	31.54 %	75.86 %	24.14 %	0.09 %	ecmascript(1638) c(65) go(14) javascript(8) python(2) xml(2) AutoHotkey(1) bash(1) perl(1) text(1)
Phix	1570	55	1782	32.69 %	78.27 %	21.73 %	0.04 %	phix(1922) Phix(7) javascript(1)
Julia	1538	34	1011	27.91 %	77.21 %	22.79 %	0.27 %	julia(1817) text(4) Julia(3) ruby(3) html5(2) cpp(1) html(1) lua(1) xml(1)
Raku	1518	30	895	28.78 %	69.35 %	30.65 %	0.59 %	raku(1958) text(7) bash(4) c(4) xml(2) html(1) rust(1) shell(1)
Go	1497	76	1809	34.56 %	75.23 %	24.77 %	0.1 %	go(1924) html(5) text(3) bash(2) c(2) xml(2) ecmascript(1) futurebasic(1) html5(1) proto(1) thrift(1)
Perl	1473	34	925	27.02 %	68.17 %	31.83 %	0.1 %	perl(2047) text(12) bash(5) shell(2) c(1) html5(1) latex(1) Perl(1)
Python	1406	72	2017	30.84 %	75.56 %	24.44 %	0.04 %	python(2669) text(13) bash(5) html5(5) c(2) cmd(2) python3(2) AutoHotkey(1) ebnf(1) perl(1) Python(1) qb64(1) shell(1) xml(1)
Nim	1402	48	1332	24.64 %	75.52 %	24.48 %	1.12 %	nim(1599) text(10) python(8) c(4) Nim(3) ruby(3) nimrod(1) xml(1)
J	1275	28	780	26.93 %	69.73 %	30.27 %	6.53 %	j(2986) text(48) J(11) bash(7) c(4) sh(4) bnf(1) html5(1) make(1) python(1) snusp(1) xml(1)
C	1215	79	1873	28.76 %	72.62 %	27.38 %	0.01 %	c(1656) text(48) cpp(11) bash(6) C(2) xml(2) assembly(1) cafe(1) d(1) go(1) html5(1) make(1) perl(1) sh(1) shell(1)
Mathematica	1177	12	422	17.56 %	70.77 %	29.23 %	0.04 %	mathematica(1485) text(35) Mathematica(8) wolfram language(2) mathematica (1) sh(1)
REXX	1146	56	3373	40.33 %	68.47 %	31.53 %	8.45 %	rexx(1766) text(11) cobol(1) sh(1)
Haskell	1138	45	1355	28.34 %	76.84 %	23.16 %	0.08 %	haskell(2089) text(7) bash(3) Haskell(3) c(1) html5(1) sh(1)
Java	1138	66	2077	33.52 %	78.56 %	21.44 %	0.01 %	java(1273) java5(223) text(6) c(4) bash(3) html5(3) xml(3) Java(2) java8(2) make(2) cmd(1) java 12(1) python(1) shell(1)
Kotlin	1132	47	1365	33.21 %	77.61 %	22.39 %	0.03 %	scala(1110) kotlin(61) c(4) groovy(2) html5(2) scheme(2) java(1) xml(1)
C++	1115	73	1973	29.27 %	72.71 %	27.29 %	0.02 %	cpp(1511) c++(14) c(8) text(4) sh(3) html5(2) asm(1) bash(1) cmake(1) d(1) make(1)
Ruby	1103	32	832	26.18 %	76.49 %	23.51 %	0.06 %	ruby(1588) bash(4) c(2) html5(2) Ruby(2) rust(1) tcl(1) text(1)
Racket	1089	34	1155	26.48 %	75.08 %	24.92 %	0.29 %	racket(1343) scheme(18) text(9) bash(1) c(1) cmd(1) html5(1) xml(1)
FreeBASIC	1073	47	1232	30.87 %	82.41 %	17.59 %	0.03 %	freebasic(1128) basic(2) qbasic(2) c(1) text(1) zxbasic(1)
zkl	1011	19	688	17.98 %	69.69 %	30.31 %	0.03 %	zkl(1728) bash(2) c(2) html5(1)
Sidef	1003	22	545	30.82 %	70.18 %	29.82 %	0.45 %	ruby(1251) sidef(4) shell(2) html5(1)

Older commentary

Second pass through after a lot of minor patches to the site and custom syntax highlighting filtering added. Should be a lot more accurate less inaccurate now. Numbers probably still don't mean anything, but they aren't quite as large outright whoppers. J numbers are still way overstated due to the very common decision to just include the output inside the language tags rather than in a separate output section. Not really sure what to do about it (if anything.) I really don't want to take on trying to untangle that mess. --Thundergnat (talk) 21:29, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Some observations: Phix numbers are completely bogus due to the custom syntax highlighting code polluting every entry. Eventually I'll look into filtering. This is a very preliminary first whack at it. I expected Raku to have a higher percent of non-ASCII characters and was very surprised by J and REXX having so much. On closer investigation, J and REXX entries make heavy use of box line drawing characters... which aren't ASCII. Syntax highlighting directives are all over the place. Case doesn't matter but spelling nominally does. Though, to be fair, most of the syntax highlighting are very minor variations, so getting it wrong probably doesn't change much. There are a whole bunch of obvious typos in there too though. Sigh. --Thundergnat (talk), 08 February

Sorry about the Phix syntax highlighting mess. I'd love to use standard Geshi, and in fact do on my own site, but waited 6 years and nothing happened. In a lovely world there would be a special page on RC containing the geshi highlighting files for all languages, that anyone could edit in the usual way with the usual single-click to undo any vandalism, and periodically (bi-annual would be plenty) some admin pushes updates into the geshi dir. I guess you could even have a <lang PhixRC> mechanism whereby "release candidate" geshi updates could be tried out on selected pages without risking damaging the whole site. Alternatively it should actually be fairly straightforward for a man of your talents to html-strip the Phix entries (just sayin), and/or I'm not above being tasked to go and clean up my own mess, which one day I still hope to be able to do (trust me, I too despise my own minor updates showing up as complete gobbledeygook). I also wonder if it would be at all useful for the syntax highlighting column to contain (first/random) links to offending pages, so I could find out what page it thinks is using say "PL/1" or "Phi"? --Pete Lomax (talk) 10:04, 10 February 2022 (UTC)