Category talk:Solutions by Programming Language
Why is this called "Solutions by Programming Language" when there's a list of programming *paradigms* but not a single listed *language*? Shouldn't this be "Solutions by Programming Paradigm" instead?
- It's not just paradigms here. There are all kinds of language features. It's solutions by language because the languages are divided by those features. Maybe it should be solutions by language feature or something. --Mwn3d 02:20, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Except that it's sorting languages by language feature, rather than solutions. A "Solutions by language feature" would require marking features-used on a per-example basis. That'd be an awesome piece of data to have available for category, search and comparison, but not particularly likely to be well-maintained. --Michael Mol 12:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- It's the way it is because that was the original category name for browsing by language, the category grew too large, and then organization was applied (first with some hand organization, then automated by language features, which we'd just started cataloging). Since it's still the original category name, the URL is over three years old; there are a lot of links to the page. Take a look at Category:Programming Languages to see what happens when no organization is applied to it. All that said, the category page body could use a lot of cleaning up. --Michael Mol 12:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
CPP is the C preprocessor, which is also the C++ preprocessor, which processes the macros for both languages. Why not treat it as a language in itself? It is possible to run the preprocessor as a standalone language processor. Examples with macros in C++ and examples with macros in C (e.g., 99 Bottles of Beer) seem to be either duplicates or very similar.
- If CPP is added as separate language, I think it would be better to call it "C preprocessor". Those acronyms tend to be obscure. --PauliKL 13:47, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Language vs Dialect
I think this collection is getting just a little out of hand - should this be sub-categorized somehow? Do we really need Visual Basic and Visual Basic .Net and VB.net (is that just redundant)? In addition to BASIC and FreeBASIC? Does it make sense to have MySQL and PostgreSQL entries? I would bet that MIRC is the same as MIRC scripting language. This whole listing here just looks kinda helter-skelter. Sgeier 18:44, 1 February 2007 (EST)
- Addendum: I also notice LISP vs Common Lisp vs Scheme.Sgeier 18:49, 1 February 2007 (EST)
- Common Lisp and Scheme are certainly different. Maybe LISP is for solutions common to either? or for the ancient Lisp dialects? Good question. --IanOsgood 17:43, 16 November 2007 (MST)
Since this language aready has tasks solved it should be added to the Solutions by Programming Language section!
- SDL isn't a programming language, it's a library which makes tasks like GUI development easier. --Short Circuit 23:28, 9 February 2007 (EST)
- I've discovered today that SDL is even a language (Simple Declarative Language); unlucky clashing. I suppose that if someone one day will add code for SDL (language), we should rename SDL (the library) to something like libSDL ... --ShinTakezou 10:06, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
C plus plus
There's still two different entries here - One for "C plus plus" and one for "C++". Sgeier 00:48, 20 February 2007 (EST)
- Finally fixed.
Bash vs. Shell vs. Unix Shell
Is this list an index or a proscriptive sort of list? Because I just wandered in looking for a reminder how to do some task X in BASH and couldn't find it. Went elsewhere, solved my needed task, then came back to figure out WTF. Searching on 'bash', I found *plenty* of references to BASH, and via them the 'Unix Shell' element on 'Solutions by Programming Language'.
So... if this is a user-friendly index, some entries like 'Bash' and/or a 'Shell' entry that then disambiguates to all the shell scripting languages might be helpful. Heck, just adding plain text under 'B' that said: BASH (see Unix Shell) would have been sensible.
- Bash now redirects to Bourne Again SHell. --IanOsgood 17:39, 16 November 2007 (MST)
So we have over 200 languages on the site, meaning that not all the pages fit in a single category listing. A few small changes to Template:Language, Template:Feature and Template:np_language resulted in a much nicer-looking and better-organized category page, There's still Category:Programming Languages for the complete listing (and any bots and such should already have been drawing from that category). Thoughts? Observations? Small edits to those three templates might reflect the largest visible change to site organization since RC's creation. --Michael Mol 05:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)