Talk:Language Comparison Table: Difference between revisions
→Other considerations for language comparision tables
m (→Perl 6 - Strongly typed: (forgot siggy)) |
|||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 150:
native mode executables? Or can the program be converted to bytecode for use by a bytecode interpreter? Or is [[JIT]] compilation used at runtime, or is the language only utilized by an interpreter?
* Input / Output Model - Does the language support the use of C IO Model, or does the language only utilize [[redirection]] operators, or does it use its own IO model (such as
* Named Locations - Does the language support the use of location names, or are line numbers required?
Line 183:
* If the language is interpreted, rather than compiled, can a [[hashbang]] mechanism be used at the top of the program to trigger an appropriate interpreter?
:Several points are related to library functions, not the language itself. Namely all about I/O, sound, graphics, terminal. The shebang mechanism is as OS question: for instance Mac OS 9 had a completely different mechanism to tell which command to use to open a given file (stored as a file property), and Windows uses the PATHEXT environment variable as well as the registry. [[User:Eoraptor|Eoraptor]] ([[User talk:Eoraptor|talk]]) 14:28, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
==Perl 6 - Strongly typed==
Line 193 ⟶ 194:
:Any or all such overloaded signatures may therefore be shadowed in an inner scope, including the coercive generic signatures. One of the strong design principles of Perl 6 is that every lexical scope know exactly what language it is using, where "exactly" does not preclude genericity, but only accidental genericity. Therefore lexical scoping is how we override anything in the outer language and produce a new language in an inner lexical scope. Since Perl 6 is designed to be completely mutable in this sense, such an inner language can appear to be as weakly typed as you like, but since all of the outer primitives are, in fact, strongly typed, Perl 6 is better characterized as strongly typed.
:But finally, I'd like to point out that the very first thing the definition in question says is that type strength is a "vague term". <tt>:-)</tt> --[[User:TimToady|TimToady]] 23:44, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
::Thanks TimToady for the answer. I'm going to have to read this again to digest it, but then I ''did'' think my comment was probably asking to reveal more than just the tip of the iceberg. (Sometime soon I'm going to have to learn more of Perl6 as it continues to pique my interest). --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 03:13, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
== REXX ==
Please add entries for
REXX
ooRexx
NetRexx
--[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 04:11, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
== Esoteric languages ==
I think esoteric languages should be added to this table, possibly in another section. --[[User:12Me21]]
: Wouldn't most of the column headings be irrelevant for most esoteric languages.? --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 23:40, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
| |||