Talk:Interactive programming (repl): Difference between revisions
m
Petelomax moved page Talk:Interactive programming to Talk:Interactive programming (repl): make it easier to find
m (Petelomax moved page Talk:Interactive programming to Talk:Interactive programming (repl): make it easier to find) |
|||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
==Omitting languages==
Did I see some sort of "omit" template a while ago for tasks that are impossible in some languages? How do you use that? This task can't be done in a couple languages I know of. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 18:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Line 12 ⟶ 13:
:::Yup. That should do it. I don't think I've created a ''template'' to add tasks to that category, but it shouldn't be difficult. (And it's preferable to adding the pages to the category directly, as using a template allows the check mechanism to change in the future.) --[[User:Short Circuit|Short Circuit]] 18:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
==... what was the task?==
I fail to see what concatenation of strings has to do with an interpreter and the latter with the language in which the task is to be implemented. I see a solution, but what was the task? --[[User:Dmitry-kazakov|Dmitry-kazakov]] 19:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
:Just starting up a CLI doesn't show enough. I added what I thought would be a simple and achievable 'sub-task' so people would get some comparison of what working in the CLI of each language is like. (Which is hard to do as the feel of a CLI can depend a lot on the editing facilities that it supports). --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 05:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Line 72 ⟶ 74:
::: '''Seen''' the BASIC code. Does it work even if you remove the 10? --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 17:14, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
:Hi PauliKL, Forth and basic come from a time (the 80's), when it made sense to include an editor that could save programs to more permanent storage, as part of the language. Since then it has become more common to separate the programming language from any editor. You seem to stumble over the fact that in the modern use of the term CLI, you can define functions, and classes etc as part of a CLI session. I say you can and so the task is valid, you say you can't and so the task is invalid. I have already sugested that you are at liberty to state that the addition of line numbers in your version of Basic which you say is necessary for the creation of functions is viewed as an editor function for that version of Basic (Their are other versions of Basic that don't even require line numbers). We may have a difference in semantics and maybe your explanation for your version of Basic will avoid any confusion. To say that what is correct nomenclature for basic is true for other languages doesn't help. We have been discussing this issue for several days now and their are several entries on the page by other authors who don't see a problem. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 19:50, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
: FWIW, with [[Tcl]]'s CLI (or a Tcl script) you create new executable symbols (commands, functions, procedures, whatever you want to call them) by issuing a command to create them. Thus, I think that to say that a CLI can't create new symbols is to introduce a totally arbitrary distinction in general (that just happens to correspond to ''some'' language's restrictions). The key distinction is between those where you can type in code interactively, and those where you have to describe it completely separately from executing it, typically because an explicit compilation step is required. And yet, I have seen a CLI for [[C]], so I suppose anything is possible with enough cleverness... –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 09:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
==Omit AWK?==
Rather than include the current entry? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 07:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
==Where's Lhogho??==
A quick search shows that the language is a version of Logo; a Logo compiler. I removed the Lhogho entry as it didn't complete the task.
The best way to add a Lhogho example would be to put it under the Logo language and point out any differences it has to any existing Logo implementation or what makes it Lhogho specific if anything. There would be no need for duplicating any example in its entirety. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 08:40, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
:Point taken. I should've read the blurb on the task too. --[[User:Axtens|Axtens]] 08:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
::Mind you, Lhogho doesn't have an interactive mode AFAICT
| |||