Talk:List of esoteric programming languages
|
|
| Contents |
The word "esoteric"
Isn't the use of the word "esoteric" POV? RickK 08:48, 25 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- The only factually-correct alternative (Programming languages known only to unwashed virgins in Star Trek shirts) is more so. -- Finlay McWalter 21:20, 26 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- I'll have you know that I bathe daily and am wearing an anime Shirt, not a Star Trek shirt. -- Rozencrantz
- "Esoteric" may sound POV, but it is, in fact, the standard (that is, generally accepted) name for a certain kind of programming languages - namely, those created - basically - for the fun of it, as opposed to more serious scientific and/or economic reasons. One may argue that some listed (like, say, Plankalkül or QuakeC) do not fall into this category, but the fact that they are relatively obscure still justifies their inclusion IMO. Outside of that, it's also worth noting that "esoteric" in this situation is synonymous with "exotic" (as in little-known, obscure, or different from the norm) and does not indicate any connections with esotericism. -- Schnee 00:55, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Scope of list
If someone thinks that listing all languages is silly, they are welcome to endeavor splitting of this list into "meaningful" and "meaningless" (or any other way of LovesMe/LovesMeNot) rather than delete entries, especially those like QuakeC that have full articles. Mikkalai 04:24, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- There is the list of programming languages, which is suitable for listing ANY noteworthy language. QuakeC is already listed there. Having a separate list of "lesser known languages" is just ridiculous, should Wikipedia also have a list of lesser-known persons? A list of esoteric languages is useful, but let it be and remain a list of esoteric languages. I disagree with Schneelocke that QuakeC is esoteric, because whereas QuakeC is little-used, it's certainly not "different from the norm" since it's basically a plain C dialect.Fredrik 12:42, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- To clarify, I believe the definition on the esoteric programming language page should be followed: Esoteric programming languages are programming languages which are designed as a proof of concept, or as jokes, and not with the intention of being adopted for real-world programming. QuakeC was most definitely designed with the intention of being adopted for real-world programming.
- If a list of "lesser-known", or "exotic" (which is not the same as "esoteric" in the context of programming languages) languages necessarily must be maintained, it should be located in a separate "list of lesser-known programming languages" article. Otherwise, I'd probably have to create a separate "list of specifically esoteric programming languages" article, and that would be silly. Fredrik 19:38, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Thank you, I see your position now and tend to agree in part. But it was unclear from your cursory comment in "summary", which sounded fairly threatening. In particular, for my lazy eye in was not immediately seen that QuakeC was not lost. As a general rule, any apparently "destructive" actions must be commented much better, for fear of miscommunication. Now, to the discussed issue:
- (1) I am not native English speaker, but IMO the word "esoteric" in its dictionary meaning fits the list perfectly: (a. Intended for or understood by only a particular group. b. Of or relating to that which is known by a restricted number of people.)
- (2) Whichever way you split or subset or otherwise classify them, there will alway be "twilight zone", borderline cases, even between "joke", "proof of concept" and "practical usage". So think twice of the outcome of changing the "rules of game": will really you achieve your goal? (and what is it, by the way?)
- Concluding: relaxen Sie bitte und watchen the Blinkenlights :-) Mikkalai 22:57, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks. Apologies from my part for the wording (and I'll ignore the accusation of vandalism ;-). I do maintain that only languages intentionally designed to be "esoteric" should be on the list. This definition, and not the dictionary definition, is after all what's linked to. If there are no further objections, I'll re-edit. Perhaps an explanatory sentence or paragraph that also links to the main list of programming languages would be a good idea in addition? Fredrik 23:06, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- If you undertake the task of cutting out the "truly esoteric" ones, are you sure you can categorize them all? For example, how would you judge the PILOT programming language? (btw., present in both lists) Mikkalai 19:29, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Good point about that one. ACS and QuakeC should definitely go though, if for no other reason then because they're really just C dialects. Fredrik 14:50, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- I mostly support Fredrik's line in this question. As I see it, mingling "just for fun"/"parody"/"mock" "programming languages" with lesser known but serious (for some purpose) programming languages, theoretic or practical ones, is unencyclopedic. As for PILOT, it would fit in the ordinary programming languages list (a serious, although not well known, educational programming language). Is there really any discussion on that?
- I'm not 110% sure on how to classify proof of concept languages, but I lean towards calling them serious as well, contrary to "silly" as defined above. --Wernher 22:01, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
While going through the list to categorize them, I noted the following to be of a questionable level of esotericism:
- BCPL
- B programming language
- Color Forth
- COMAL programming language
- Io programming language
- JOSS programming language
- Logo programming language
- MDL programming language
- MUMPS
- PILOT programming language
- PL/M programming language
- Plankalkül
- TECO
Fredrik 07:48, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I concur. B and BCPL were serious historical ancestors of the C language. ColorForth is unusual, but also a full operating system, with which the language's author (Chuck Moore, the original author of the Forth language) makes his living! Logo is a teaching language as serious as Pascal in my opinion. I've seen Plankalkül in other esoteric lists, partly because it was obtuse and partly because it was never implemented. Plankalkül should certainly also reside in a list of historically interesting languages, as perhaps the first design for a high level programming language.
Homespring programming language
I came upon Homespring programming language randomly. I think esoteric programming languages are cool, so I read it, made some edits, then followed the external link to learn more. At which point (after half an hour) I found out that it's nothing more than some undergrad's utterly un-noted invention. I'm actually a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians, but I'm planning to nominate that page for deletion. It gets zero relevant Google hits besides the author's home page. There's no evidence it's been published, peer reviewed, or used by anyone at all.
My main problem with the article is that it fools the reader into thinking the subject is notable. I suspect that a lot of the esoteric programming language pages linked from here share the same problem. There simply aren't that many notable esoteric languages. Does anyone have a better way to solve the problem than VfD?
Dbenbenn 03:26, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Nobody said anything, so I nominated it for deletion, and it was deleted. dbenbenn | talk 20:45, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- In the Esoteric programming language article, an esolang is described as a programming language designed as a test of the boundaries of computer programming language design, as a proof of concept, or as joke, and not with the intention of being adopted for real-world programming. I think Homespring fits this description, and I strongly disagree with it being deleted. You are entirely correct in that a lot of the esoteric languages shares Homesprings "problem" (that it is not serious enough for your taste), but I don't see that as a problem. Runeberge 01:21, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
PingPong
Currently the link "PingPong" redirects to the Pong game; furthermore the external link does not work at all. Googling around I've seen this description which could perhaps be used as a stub:
PingPong - http://www.inz.info/pingpong/ An interpreted two dimensional language based on "Befunge". It is not intended to create useful programs but just to experiment with an unusual programming concept.
- pgimeno 17:26, 2005 May 1 (UTC)
Does all these languages belong in the WikiPedia?
Whether or not all these languages belong here on the WikiPedia has been discussed several times. Once, most of them was up for deletion, but it was voted down. Still, occasionally some are arbitrarily deleted. Some of us in the esolang community feel that WikiPedia is neither a safe nor proper place to have such a comprehensive archive of esolangs, and we are working to set up an alternative.
Pedro Gimeno has written a nice summary of the options discussed so far here: http://www.formauri.es/personal/pgimeno/misc/elpp.html
In my opinion, if we can get an alternative up and running, with sufficient mirrors/backups, we should remove most of the languages from the Pedia. The ones I think deserve staying are: Brainfuck, INTERCAL, Befunge, Unlambda, Malbolge, Whitespace and Var'aq. I would like to hear other opinions on this, though. The list could stay, but consisting of mostly external links.
I ask that people please refrain from deleting any more articles until we have moved them to a new location.
Runeberge 13:25, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Attention authors of these articles!
As we all know, esoteric programming languages are great, but many of them are original research, or are just not notable enough to belong on Wikipedia. To address this problem, I, with support from several members of the esolang community, have created a separate esolang wiki (http://esoteric.voxelperfect.net/wiki/Language_list).
We don't want to exactly copy and paste Wikipedia articles, because some of the organization can be improved upon, for instance. But there is some good stuff in here. So I call upon authors of these articles, or significant portions thereof, to relinquish their copyrights and make their esolang-related text public domain (our choice of "license"), in order that relevant portions of this work may be used.
Also, please don't delete any of these pages until the information has been duplicated elsewhere. Thanks. Graue 05:56, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
- I have contributed several esoteric programming language articles and I hereby state that all my esoteric programming language related contributions are public domain. Unfortunately I am in the middle of my military service so I don't have the time to move the articles to the dedicated wiki myself. I already read about the esolang wiki from the esolang mailing list, I think it's a great idea. Cheers. (Esolang-articles I have created: COW programming language, Whirl, Argh!, ETA programming language, Java2K, Bubble programming language, GOTO++, L00P, Numberix, Muriel, SMITH programming language, SMETANA programming language, Bullfrog programming language, Thue programming language, Iota and Jot programming languages, ALPACA programming language, Aura programming language, Whenever, Blue programming language, TMMLPTEALPAITAFNFAL, BDAMD. Check that the latest version is also by me or ask the author(s) of the latest version(s) to PD their edits, or just snatch an old version). --ZeroOne 16:07, 29 May 2005 (UTC)