Anonymous user
Category talk:Non-Programming Languages: Difference between revisions
Category talk:Non-Programming Languages (view source)
Revision as of 09:52, 6 July 2009
, 14 years agothat's just silly!
(Confused with declarative?) |
(that's just silly!) |
||
Line 6:
In what sense HTML and XML are not programming languages? Computers are programmed. Data is an input or output of a program. I cannot tell what do you mean under "focusing on data". Probably, it is just a confusion with ''declarative'' versus ''imperative'' approaches to '''programming'''. Languages using either declarative or imperative approach are still programming ones. Anyway, so long a language is a '''computer''' language it does ''program'' that computer. The text in any computer language is called ''program''. So in what sense a computer language can be non-programming? P.S. Note that for HTML/XML, the source code is the text in HTML/XML correspondingly. Just per definition: the source code of a program is a stored text in the language the program was written. --[[User:Dmitry-kazakov|Dmitry-kazakov]] 09:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
: They're not programming languages because they don't give instructions. They just describe a particular pattern of data; there's no execution model. (OK, HTML is a bit of a border case if you're wanting to render it, given the blecherous mess that it has grown into.) To argue that XML is a programming language is really strange. It's just a serialization format of a node tree, and is no more a programming language than ASN.1 or S-Expressions are (though [[Lisp]] is built on top of the latter). If you're going to use a non-standard definition of “programming”, I'll not bother arguing with you. —[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 09:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
| |||