Jump to content
  • Advertisement

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

smorgasbord

So... what IS a real language?

This topic is 5530 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Sometimes you hear that programming language X isn''t a "real" language, or that "proper" programmers exclusively use language Y (preferably in combination with graphics library Z). I think it would be interesting to see what you people consider a "real" language or what constitutes a "real" programmer (is it an absolute must to have implemented your own linked list, understand in detail how the computer stores numbers, not be using Java... )? At what level do you think a "language" turns too high level to be "programmed in"? Looking forward to seeing your opinions on this... Cheers, smorgasbord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
Anyone who says anything isn''t a real language is a moron, plain and simple. Every language is good for something (yes, even Malbolge).

Most of the time, people who bash on a language do so because they have ego problems and need to reinforce their self esteem. By claiming that they have The Skillz, and everyone else is a stupid script kiddie, they apparently make themselves feel better. All of this is, IMHO, pretty funny.

The rest of the time, people bash on languages because they have absolutely no clue what they are talking about -- which is even funnier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Basically you can say that anything that needs a parser is a language.

In the next 80 years 6 billion people will die...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Klingon is not a real language.

Any computer language that allows you to meet your goals is a ''real'' language. As far as knowing how to implement your own linked list, it''s not a bad idea to know stuff like that. I think people who have a good understanding of how your computer stores data, what a page fault is, what a race condition is, etc. will be better programmers in the long run. I think a lot of the criticism that C gets is that it''s buggy and, therefore, not efficient. While some of that might be true, a lot of it is also overstated by frustrated people who don''t know how their computer works and, as a result, can''t find bugs that are rather obvious. The more you know about your computer, the better programmer you will be. This is not to say that someone who has very little knowledge of how their computer works and is just chomping away at java is not a real programmer, but there is a limit to what such a programmer can achieve. As long as his goals fall within those limits, more power to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Klingon is not a real language?

then why is the state of Oregon hiring Klingon interpreters?

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/West/05/10/offbeat.klingon.interpreter/index.html

:-P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
then why is the state of Oregon hiring Klingon interpreters?

Because Oregon isn''t a real state, I suppose.



Stevie

Don''t follow me, I''m lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i read that article at the link, and i must say i never knew being a dork was a mental illness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hummm well each language has its strong points and its weak points. as far as what a "real" language is I''d say it must be capable to run on its own. I guess I should be a little more clear on this, it can run with out the benifit of an interpriter (compiles to machine code). perl, python, & java are not "real" languages in my book they are scripting languages (yes jits compilers would somewhat make java a real language, but lets not get into this). C, C++, & assembly are "real" languages.

does this mean that you should only use C & friends? no, if you don''t need the capabilities of these languages and some other language is better suited use the other language, I do.

A "real" programer is someone that can take white paper or spec doc and turn it into code. Of corse I don''t expect every programer to be able to write quake for such docs. What I''m saying is can they look at a spec for something of a reasonable leve and beable to write it with out cut & pasting, with out having someone hold there hand the whole way. tell this point you are eather a wanabe or a script kiddy.

I''ve never seen a language that is to high level for programing. I''ve seen alot of languages that are so high level I wouldn''t use them to write a quake clone, but I''d still consider them for something like solitare or a buiseness app.

again this goes back to the strengths and weaknesses of the language compaired to the needs of the program

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A real language as opposed to a research language (or a toy language) is one that is not so idealistic or dogmatic in its design that you can actually write real programs with it.

It''s not so much the language, as the enviroment and platform that is ''real''. One can take a langauge previously percevied as a toy and create an industrial strength environment - one that compiles in some form and can interoperate with other compiled code.

Is Brain F*ck a ''real'' language? It seems it''s a toy.
ML is a good example of a research language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!