Template talk:Language: Difference between revisions
m
→Commenting out HOPL parameters: No action necessary
No edit summary |
Thundergnat (talk | contribs) m (→Commenting out HOPL parameters: No action necessary) |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
Line 3:
There is no "execution method" ? (Interpreted, Compiled, Bytecode) --[[User:Guga360|Guga360]] 02:38, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
:That feature category isn't created yet. It's discussed [[Category talk:Feature|here]]. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 02:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
can the value choices be a bit more flexible? [[Pike]] for example compiles into a mix of bytecode and machinecode, therefore neither bytecode nor machine are correct.--[[User:EMBee|eMBee]] 06:45, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
== Less functionality? ==
What happened to the links to unimplemented tasks and examples that need attention? --[[User:Glennj|glennj]] 20:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
: I put those pages in their respective language's categories, but forgot to move their sort order so they would float to the top. Consequently, you can see them listed under "R", for "Reports". The ENA listing was merged into the unimpl page, but the ENA ''category'' is a subcategory of the language category, so the ENA category already gets near-top billing. If I could easily turn the "Unimpl" page listings into categories, I would. My intent was to make the descriptive templates more succinct and less redundant. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 23:21, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
:: That has the effect of almost completely obscuring them. Consider Tcl, Python and Ruby (top 3 langs) -- more than 200 tasks implemented so the "{language} examples needing attention" subcategory and the "R" tasks don't even show up on the first page. Particularly for Tcl, where one has to scroll past a lot of expository information before the subcategories are displayed.
:: Also, if we're interested in newcomers picking up unimplemented tasks, we want those tasks to be easily found.
:: Clearly, I'm not in favour of the change. --[[User:Glennj|glennj]] 18:51, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
::: Noting again that they appear on the [[:Category:Unimplemented_tasks_by_language|Unimpl pages]], if I fix the sort order so they appear at the beginning, will that be sufficient? (I've been meaning to do that for a few days, but I've been playing catch-up with work thanks to being out of the office due to H1N1.) Also, that page I linked to (also linked to from the front page and the "Solve a Task" link on the left) has been the most popular page on the site for the past week, though the linkage is new and we had a Redditing to it, so it remains to be seen how long that pattern lasts. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 23:37, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
== Commenting out HOPL parameters ==
Since the HOPL site is dead since December 2011 (see also [[Rosetta_Code:Village_Pump/hopl.murdoch.edu.au_Unavailable]]) I suggest to comment out the two HOPL parameters ('''hopl''' and '''hopl id''') in the template because they currently just create dead links. If the site will ever come back we could simply enable them again. --[[User:AndiPersti|Andreas Perstinger]] ([[User talk:AndiPersti|talk]]) 09:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
::HOPL status has changed: [[Rosetta_Code:Village_Pump/hopl.murdoch.edu.au_Unavailable]]
::[https://dev.to/bugmagnet/series/5145 DEV.to HOPL Series' Articles]
::[https://HoPL.info/ History of Programming Languages]
::
:: Maybe someone can repair the template?
:: And while they are at it, perhaps the reference to HOPL in the template Usage table could include the expansion of the acronym as History of Programming Languages so Newbies understand.
::[[User:GarveyPatrickD|GarveyPatrickD]] ([[User talk:GarveyPatrickD|talk]]) 22:20, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
:::<blockquote>HOPL status has changed:</blockquote>
:::They are back online again as of February 2020 so no action necessary. Also, that template was last edited in 2011 and has been locked ever since. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 23:09, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
| |||