Talk:Generational list of programming languages

Multiple inheritance

Why is C# listed as a derivative of C, but Java is not? The whole premise of this list, i.e. that languages form a simple tree is a bit suspect. 0xBAC 06:56, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)

An interesting idea, but I agree a tree is suspect—I think you can so a tree of principal influences and pointers to other. But where is Smalltalk? Where is Prolog? RPL? If we have VBScript, why not Javascript. What about Perl, PHP. Isn't SQL a language, other 4GLs. What about shell scripts- TeX- assemblers?

There are languages that, arguably, are created specifically in an attempt to "merge" the outstanding characteristics of two other languages. J is a good example: if one didn't knew that APL was also created by Iverson, it would be hard to say whether J is influenced more by APL than Backus's FP/FL or viceversa. I ended up listing it under both and making a referential note. Sure enough, if this technique were to be missused , the Generational list would end up being a Generational mesh ;-) --Danakil

Indeed—the concept of multiple inheritance is rampant, here :-). Rexx, for example, has a strong syntactic resemblance to PL/I, with symbolic concepts adapted from BASIC and the PL/I macro processor, and many semantic aspects (few limits and system interfaces in particular) taken from EXEC 2. mfc

Err, maybe I'm reading something wrong, but shouldn't NGL be under J instead of K? Egregius

Worse: why is C# listed under C at all? There are trivial syntax differences between C# and Java, whereas there are major conceptual differences between C# and C. For example, C# is all-garbage collected; C is not, but Java is. C# compiles (normally) to a byte code; C does not, but Java does (generally). C# does not support RAII (because the 'finalizers' aren't called at any particular time); C does and Java does not.

While there is a resemblance to Java, C#'s reserved words and operators pretty much match C++. And, given Anders Hejlsberg's work in development of Turbo Pascal and Delphi, C# probably has as much cause to be in the ALGOL/Pascal/Modula tree as anywhere. Also, call it p-code or byte-code -- the concept and practice of virtual machines first saw widespread use in the 1970s in UCSD Pascal's p-system... Hejlsberg says in Deep Inside C#: An Interview with Microsoft Chief Architect Anders Hejlsberg that "In the design of C#, we looked at a lot of languages. We looked at C++, we looked at Java, at Modula 2, C, and we looked at Smalltalk. There are just so many languages that have the same core ideas that we're interested in, such as deep object-orientation, object-simplification, and so on." So, here's another vote for something other than a tree model. 209.98.143.77 20:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the whole tree format is inherantly flawed for this information. It really needs a graph for multipule parents and cycles. C(99), for example, did take some inspirations from C++(98), which was inspired by C(89).

Things in real life are not always perfect representations of concepts. This list is great. It should be assumed that ideas spread.90.134.99.224 (talk) 14:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concurrent Turing

Hi, There is no such language as Concurrent Turing. Turing Plus is concurrent, but it has never been called Concurrent Turing.

Jim Cordy (co-author of the Turing, Turing Plus and Object-Oriented Turing languages)

Dialects of BASIC.

In the languages that have descended from the BASIC branch of the tree, some of the entries are just BASIC dialects (eg. QBasic) rather than BASIC-derived languages like COMAL. Should we prune this tree from the BASIC branch and instead start a generational list of BASIC dialects? Ae-a 04:57, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the dialects are interesting. We should add more, such as Integer BASIC and Applesoft BASIC. Maybe there should be a way to denote that a language is a dialect.90.134.99.224 (talk) 13:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BASIC is correctly listed under FORTRAN because their original purposes and syntax for mathematical calculations were similar. But implementations have been typically radically different -- all early BASICs were interpreted; FORTRAN has always been compiled. Fair enough; but Perl was originally writtent to combine the capabilities of ksh and awk, while adding some of Larry Wall's ideas (correct, it turns out) as to what would be useful. Perl is apparently listed under C simply because it uses curly brackets to mark logical blocks of code, but this seems a rather shallow criterion. Why not under BASIC, since both use $ as a variable marker (though BASIC only for strings, and it's a suffix) and both are interpreted? This attempt to shoehorn computer languages into a strict genealogy tree seems strained and arbitrary in many respects. (Why is Modula-2 an independent branch of ALGOL instead of a descendent of Pascal? Is ADA related to Pascal or Modula? etc. etc. etc.) -- Craig Goodrich 24.14.168.244 (talk) 00:36, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Simula and ALGOL 60

Shouldn't Simula be listed under ALGOL 60? Kaldari 07:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

isn't perl a derivitive of Pascal?

IO recantly read that perl was derivided from pascal (was derived from ALGOL) but here its listed as a from C? Oxinabox (talk) 01:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Visual Basic

Visual Basic is much more rememincient of C++, than of original BASIC. even in some syntax. It my have evolved from BASIC, folllowing Microsoft's quick basic, - visual basic 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 line. but by the time VB^ comes around it's been so heavily influenced by C++. DOn't know what should be done, Maybe a cross reference in the tree? Oxinabox (talk) 01:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmpf. I took a look at T-SQL recently (on a dare) and have come to the conclusion that in Redmond's damp climate, all languages rot into a form of Visual Basic in three years or less. -- Craig Goodrich 24.14.168.244 (talk) 00:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

-based or -influenced

The list is organized by which language a given language was based upon. How about saying a given language was influenced by a language rather than based upon it?90.134.106.50 (talk) 15:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Is Scala (programming language) missing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.162.208.204 (talk) 23:36, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is MATLAB Programming missing ? MATLAB programming supports OOPS and activex server programming too. Is it missing because it is costly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.200.157.177 (talk) 21:02, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having programmed in both SNOBOL3 and COMIT, I can assure you that they are utterly different in style, syntax, model of the universe, and everything else except that a) statements were punched into the first 72 columns of a Hollerith card, b) they were both text-processing languages, and c) both are deader than Etruscan. I wrote my first program around 1967 in the basement of the Old Gym at Indiana U in Bloomington, a former basketball court converted to house a CDC-3400/3600 system (the 3400 acted as an input preprocessor for the 3600). So why is SNOBOL shown as a "descendant" of COMIT? -- Craig Goodrich 24.14.168.244 (talk) 00:05, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Mark 1 Autocode (the first publicly available high level programming language, a couple of years before Fortran) not on this list? Or the original (Glennie, 1952) Manchester Autocode? They probably ought to be here. MichealT (talk) 14:07, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Python is not C=based definetely

Python is based on Modula-2/Oberon models, not C. It should be placed in Pascal family near Lua. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.80.71.142 (talk) 22:19, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 python is based on many languages but the syntax is from ABC~fred  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.250.190.3 (talk) 02:07, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should SETL (correctly listed as parent of ABC and grandparent of Python) really be a root? I have always assumed it was strongly influenced by ALGOL. However I cannot find any mention of this by Jack Schwartz or anyone else involved in the design of the language. --Finnw (talk) 20:09, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

D is more based on C++ than C

It was designed as a replacement for C++ and includes almost all features presented in C++. Vladislav.kuzkokov (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redlinked languages and WP:WTAF?

Should this list be subject to WP:WTAF? There are a number of redlinks, and more get added over time, although some are removed as well. On List of programming languages‎, for example, the no redlink policy is fairly strictly enforced. I think the policy should apply here, but as it clearly has not been really enforced in some time (if ever), I thought I'd open a discussion before removing them. I've recently removed the redlinks from List of programming languages by type, without objection (and some encouragement from another editor), although the problem was more severe there. Rwessel (talk) 07:54, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Go for it. WP:BEBOLD. Msnicki (talk) 08:07, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. A summary:

A variety of redlinks and other items without articles were removed per WP:WTAF.

Today based section removed – no primary article, only a stub for the single derived language.

Neat3 removed – link only

RPG: link removed, in article

{{reflist}} removed (no more references)

Rwessel (talk) 20:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]