Rosetta Code:Village Pump/SpecificationLanguages: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(forgot to sign) |
(old duplicate topic, not sure if redirection or deletion would be better) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
#REDIRECT [[Rosetta_Code:Village_Pump/Specification_Languages]] |
|||
{{Vptopic |
|||
|topic=Specification Languages |
|||
|summary=What languages can be included in Rosetta Code? |
|||
}} |
|||
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 [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alloy_(specification_language) Alloy]. |
|||
So, is it programming languages only, or do we tolerate languages that are only "somewhat executable"? - [[User:Wmeyer|Wmeyer]] ([[User talk:Wmeyer|talk]]) 13:33, 1 August 2013 (UTC) |
|||