Category talk:Non-Programming Languages: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Category talk:Non-Programming Languages (view source)

Revision as of 23:10, 6 July 2009

1,173 bytes added , 14 years ago

WP definition

Ce

973

edits

Revision as of 15:10, 6 July 2009 (view source) rosettacode>Mwn3d (General approval) ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 23:10, 6 July 2009 (view source) Ce (talk \| contribs) (WP definition)
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 21: It might be a better idea to not have this "negative" category and instead have positive ones, e.g. "Programming language", "Document language" (html, svg, latex, ...), "Data format" (json), ...--[[User:Kevin Reid\|Kevin Reid]] 14:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC) I am afraid it still confuses things. This round it is Turing-completeness and the language purpose. A data description language, or a text processing language can perfectly be Turing complete. The notable example is the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_life Conway's life]. The "language" of its configurations has no "algorithmic" purpose. Nevertheless it is Turing-complete. Is it a programming language? At the same time [[SQL]] is not Turing-complete. Is it a non-programming language then? As for "execution semantics", that rather is a hidden reference to imperative programming. Do [[Prolog]] or [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulink MATLAB/SIMULINK] have it? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printer_Command_Language PCL] does not? My opinion is that any computer language is a programming one independently on its power or purpose. --[[User:Dmitry-kazakov\|Dmitry-kazakov]] 21:09, 6 July 2009 (UTC) : According to [[wp:Programming language\|Wikipedia]]: "A programming language is a machine-readable artificial language designed to express computations that can be performed by a machine, particularly a computer." --[[User:Ce\|Ce]] 23:10, 6 July 2009 (UTC)