Sandbox: Difference between revisions

From Rosetta Code
Content added Content deleted
m (Not sure where this should go...)
m (Added tons of links to the table)
Line 1: Line 1:
{|class="wikitable sortable"
{|class="wikitable sortable"
! [[Programming Language|Language]]
! Language
! Paradigm(s)
! Paradigm(s)
! Standarized
! Standarized
! Type strength
! [[Type strength]]
! Type safety
! [[Type safety]]
! Expression of types
! Expression of types
! Type Compatability
! Type Compatability
Line 12: Line 12:
|-
|-
! [[ActionScript]]
! [[ActionScript]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, event-driven programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], event-driven programming
| {{yes}}, ECMA
| {{yes}}, [[ECMA]]
| strong
| strong
| safe
| safe
Line 23: Line 23:
|-
|-
! [[Ada]]
! [[Ada]]
| concurrent, distributed programming, generic programming, imperative programming, object-oriented
| concurrent, distributed programming, generic programming, [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]]
| {{yes}}, ANSI, ISO
| {{yes}}, [[ANSI]], ISO
| strong
| strong
| safe
| safe
Line 34: Line 34:
|-
|-
! [[ALGOL 68]]
! [[ALGOL 68]]
| concurrent, imperative programming
| concurrent, [[imperative programming]]
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 45: Line 45:
|-
|-
! [[BASIC]]
! [[BASIC]]
| procedural programming
| [[procedural programming]]
| {{yes}}, ANSI, ISO
| {{yes}}, [[ANSI]], ISO
| varies by dialect
| varies by dialect
|
|
Line 56: Line 56:
|-
|-
! [[C]]
! [[C]]
| imperative programming
| [[imperative programming]]
| {{yes}}, ANSI C89, ISO C90/C99
| {{yes}}, [[ANSI]] C89, ISO C90/C99
| weak
| weak
| unsafe
| unsafe
Line 67: Line 67:
|-
|-
! [[C sharp|C#]]
! [[C sharp|C#]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, generic programming, reflective programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], generic programming, reflective programming
| {{yes}}, ECMA, ISO
| {{yes}}, [[ECMA]], ISO
| strong
| strong
| safe (but unsafe allowed)
| safe (but unsafe allowed)
Line 78: Line 78:
|-
|-
! [[C++]]
! [[C++]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, generic programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], generic programming
| {{yes}}, ISO
| {{yes}}, ISO
| strong
| strong
Line 89: Line 89:
|-
|-
! [[Clean]]
! [[Clean]]
| functional programming, generic programming
| [[functional programming]], generic programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 100: Line 100:
|-
|-
! [[COBOL]]
! [[COBOL]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]]
| {{yes}}
| {{yes}}
| strong
| strong
Line 111: Line 111:
|-
|-
! [[ColdFusion]]
! [[ColdFusion]]
| procedural programming, object-oriented
| [[procedural programming]], [[object-oriented]]
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| weak
| weak
Line 122: Line 122:
|-
|-
! [[Common Lisp]]
! [[Common Lisp]]
| imperative programming, functional programming, object-oriented
| [[imperative programming]], [[functional programming]], [[object-oriented]]
| {{yes}}
| {{yes}}
| strong
| strong
Line 130: Line 130:
| dynamic
| dynamic
| General
| General
| Standardize Lisp
| Standardize [[Lisp]]
|-
|-
! [[D]]
! [[D]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, generic programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], generic programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 144: Line 144:
|-
|-
! [[Eiffel]]
! [[Eiffel]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, generic programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], generic programming
| {{yes}}, ECMA-367, ISO/IEC 25436:2006
| {{yes}}, [[ECMA]]-367, ISO/IEC 25436:2006
| strong
| strong
| safe
| safe
Line 155: Line 155:
|-
|-
! [[Erlang]]
! [[Erlang]]
| functional programming, concurrent, distributed programming
| [[functional programming]], concurrent, distributed programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 166: Line 166:
|-
|-
! [[Forth]]
! [[Forth]]
| imperative programming, stack-oriented
| [[imperative programming]], stack-oriented
| {{yes}}, ANSI
| {{yes}}, [[ANSI]]
| none
| none
| n/a
| n/a
Line 177: Line 177:
|-
|-
! [[Fortran]]
! [[Fortran]]
| imperative programming, procedural programming, object-oriented
| [[imperative programming]], [[procedural programming]], [[object-oriented]]
| {{yes}}
| {{yes}}
| strong
| strong
Line 188: Line 188:
|-
|-
! [[Groovy]]
! [[Groovy]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, aspect-oriented programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], aspect-oriented programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 196: Line 196:
| dynamic
| dynamic
| Application
| Application
| JVM compatibility
| [[JVM]] compatibility
|-
|-
! [[Haskell]]
! [[Haskell]]
| functional programming, generic programming, lazy evaluation
| [[functional programming]], generic programming, lazy evaluation
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 210: Line 210:
|-
|-
! [[J]]
! [[J]]
| array programming, function-level programming, tacit programming
| [[array]] programming, function-level programming, tacit programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 221: Line 221:
|-
|-
! [[Java]]
! [[Java]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, generic programming, reflective programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], generic programming, reflective programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 232: Line 232:
|-
|-
! [[JavaScript]]
! [[JavaScript]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, functional programming, reflective programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], [[functional programming]], reflective programming
| {{yes}}
| {{yes}}
| weak
| weak
Line 243: Line 243:
|-
|-
! [[Joy]]
! [[Joy]]
| functional programming, stack-oriented
| [[functional programming]], stack-oriented
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 250: Line 250:
|
|
| dynamic
| dynamic
| Functional programming research
| [[functional programming]] research
| [[concatenative]]
| Concatenative
|-
|-
! [[Lisp]]
! [[Lisp]]
| functional programming, reflective; others vary by dialect
| [[functional programming]], reflective; others vary by dialect
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 265: Line 265:
|-
|-
! [[Lua]]
! [[Lua]]
| procedural programming, imperative programming, reflective
| [[procedural programming]], [[imperative programming]], reflective
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 276: Line 276:
|-
|-
! [[Mathematica]]
! [[Mathematica]]
| functional programming, procedural programming
| [[functional programming]], [[procedural programming]]
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 287: Line 287:
|-
|-
! [[Object Pascal]] ([[Delphi]])
! [[Object Pascal]] ([[Delphi]])
| imperative programming, object-oriented, generic programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], generic programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 298: Line 298:
|-
|-
! [[Objective-C]]
! [[Objective-C]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, reflective programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], reflective programming
| {{yes}}
| {{yes}}
| weak
| weak
Line 309: Line 309:
|-
|-
! [[Ocaml]]
! [[Ocaml]]
| object-oriented, functional programming, imperative programming, generic programming
| [[object-oriented]], [[functional programming]], [[imperative programming]], generic programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 320: Line 320:
|-
|-
! [[Oz]]
! [[Oz]]
| logic programming, functional programming, imperative programming, object-oriented, concurrent programming - multi paradigm
| logic programming, [[functional programming]], [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], concurrent programming - multi paradigm
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
|
|
Line 331: Line 331:
|-
|-
! [[Pascal]]
! [[Pascal]]
| imperative programming, procedural programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[procedural programming]]
| {{yes}}
| {{yes}}
| strong
| strong
Line 342: Line 342:
|-
|-
! [[Perl]]
! [[Perl]]
| imperative programming, procedural programming, reflective programming, functional programming, object-oriented, generic programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[procedural programming]], reflective programming, [[functional programming]], [[object-oriented]], generic programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| weak
| weak
Line 353: Line 353:
|-
|-
! [[PHP]]
! [[PHP]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, reflective programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], reflective programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| weak
| weak
Line 372: Line 372:
| dynamic
| dynamic
| Problem solving, Artificial intelligence
| Problem solving, Artificial intelligence
| Declarative programming
| [[declarative programming]]
|-
|-
! [[Python]]
! [[Python]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, functional programming, aspect-oriented programming, reflective programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], [[functional programming]], aspect-oriented programming, reflective programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 386: Line 386:
|-
|-
! [[Ruby]]
! [[Ruby]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, aspect-oriented programming, reflective programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], aspect-oriented programming, reflective programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 397: Line 397:
|-
|-
! [[Scala]]
! [[Scala]]
| object-oriented, functional programming, generic programming
| [[object-oriented]], [[functional programming]], generic programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 408: Line 408:
|-
|-
! [[Scheme]]
! [[Scheme]]
| functional programming
| [[functional programming]]
| {{yes}}
| {{yes}}
| strong
| strong
Line 419: Line 419:
|-
|-
! [[Smalltalk]]
! [[Smalltalk]]
| object-oriented, concurrent programming, event-driven programming, imperative programming, declarative programming
| [[object-oriented]], concurrent programming, event-driven programming, [[imperative programming]], [[declarative programming]]
| {{yes}}, ANSI
| {{yes}}, [[ANSI]]
| strong
| strong
| safe
| safe
Line 430: Line 430:
|-
|-
! [[Tcl]]
! [[Tcl]]
| imperative programming, procedural programming, event-driven programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[procedural programming]], event-driven programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
|
|
Line 452: Line 452:
|-
|-
! [[Visual Basic .NET]]
! [[Visual Basic .NET]]
| object-oriented, event-driven programming
| [[object-oriented]], event-driven programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 463: Line 463:
|-
|-
! [[Windows PowerShell]]
! [[Windows PowerShell]]
| imperative programming, object-oriented, functional programming, pipeline programming, reflective programming
| [[imperative programming]], [[object-oriented]], [[functional programming]], pipeline programming, reflective programming
| {{no}}
| {{no}}
| strong
| strong
Line 473: Line 473:
|
|
|-class="sortbottom"
|-class="sortbottom"
! [[Programming Language|Language]]
! Language
! Paradigm(s)
! Paradigm(s)
! Standarized
! Standarized
! Type strength
! [[Type strength]]
! Type safety
! [[Type safety]]
! Expression of types
! Expression of types
! Type Compatability
! Type Compatability

Revision as of 04:49, 15 July 2008

Language Paradigm(s) Standarized Type strength Type safety Expression of types Type Compatability Type checking Intended use Design goals
ActionScript imperative programming, object-oriented, event-driven programming Yes

, ECMA

strong safe static Web design
Ada concurrent, distributed programming, generic programming, imperative programming, object-oriented Yes

, ANSI, ISO

strong safe explicit nominative static Embedded, Realtime applications Reliability
ALGOL 68 concurrent, imperative programming No strong safe structural static or dynamic Application Readability, Structure
BASIC procedural programming Yes

, ANSI, ISO

varies by dialect Education Simplicity
C imperative programming Yes

, ANSI C89, ISO C90/C99

weak unsafe explicit nominative static System Low level access, Minimal constraint
C# imperative programming, object-oriented, generic programming, reflective programming Yes

, ECMA, ISO

strong safe (but unsafe allowed) implicit nominative static Application Rapid application development
C++ imperative programming, object-oriented, generic programming Yes

, ISO

strong safe (but unsafe allowed) explicit, partially implicit nominative, structural static, dynamic Application, System Abstraction, Efficiency, Compatibility
Clean functional programming, generic programming No strong implicit static General Correctness, Modularity
COBOL imperative programming, object-oriented Yes strong static Business and Financial Applications Readability
ColdFusion procedural programming, object-oriented No weak implicit dynamic Web Development Rapid Application Development, Ease of use
Common Lisp imperative programming, functional programming, object-oriented Yes strong safe dynamic General Standardize Lisp
D imperative programming, object-oriented, generic programming No strong safe explicit static Application, System Compilability, Correctness, Efficiency
Eiffel imperative programming, object-oriented, generic programming Yes

, ECMA-367, ISO/IEC 25436:2006

strong safe nominative static Application Correctness, Efficiency, Design by contract
Erlang functional programming, concurrent, distributed programming No strong dynamic Telecom and distributed applications Fault tolerance, Scalability
Forth imperative programming, stack-oriented Yes

, ANSI

none n/a n/a n/a n/a Application, Embedded systems Compact implementations
Fortran imperative programming, procedural programming, object-oriented Yes strong safe nominative static Scientific and numeric applications Runtime efficiency, Simple syntax
Groovy imperative programming, object-oriented, aspect-oriented programming No strong safe implicit dynamic Application JVM compatibility
Haskell functional programming, generic programming, lazy evaluation No strong implicit structural static Application Lazy evaluation, Explicit side-effect
J array programming, function-level programming, tacit programming No strong safe dynamic Data processing Terseness, Expressiveness, Powerful Data Manipulation
Java imperative programming, object-oriented, generic programming, reflective programming No strong safe explicit nominative static Application Write once run anywhere
JavaScript imperative programming, object-oriented, functional programming, reflective programming Yes weak dynamic Client side web scripting
Joy functional programming, stack-oriented No strong safe dynamic functional programming research concatenative
Lisp functional programming, reflective; others vary by dialect No strong dynamic General Simple notation for Lambda calculus, Homoiconicity
Lua procedural programming, imperative programming, reflective No strong safe implicit dynamic Host-driven Scripting Small, embedded, configuration.
Mathematica functional programming, procedural programming No strong dynamic Numeric computation and visualization
Object Pascal (Delphi) imperative programming, object-oriented, generic programming No strong safe (but unsafe allowed) explicit nominative static Application, System Readability, Rapid application development, Modularity
Objective-C imperative programming, object-oriented, reflective programming Yes weak explicit static Application Smalltalk like, Component based code reuse, C compatibility
Ocaml object-oriented, functional programming, imperative programming, generic programming No strong safe implicit structural static Application Efficiency, Robustness, Correctness
Oz logic programming, functional programming, imperative programming, object-oriented, concurrent programming - multi paradigm No dynamic Education
Pascal imperative programming, procedural programming Yes strong safe explicit static Education Readability, Discipline, Modularity
Perl imperative programming, procedural programming, reflective programming, functional programming, object-oriented, generic programming No weak implicit dynamic Text processing, Scripting Terseness, Expressiveness
PHP imperative programming, object-oriented, reflective programming No weak dynamic Web Application, CLI Robustness and Simplicity
Prolog logic programming Yes

, ISO

strong dynamic Problem solving, Artificial intelligence declarative programming
Python imperative programming, object-oriented, functional programming, aspect-oriented programming, reflective programming No strong safe implicit dynamic Application, Education, Scripting Simplicity, Readability, Expressiveness, Modularity
Ruby imperative programming, object-oriented, aspect-oriented programming, reflective programming No strong implicit dynamic Application, Scripting Expressiveness, Readability
Scala object-oriented, functional programming, generic programming No strong partially implicit static Education
Scheme functional programming Yes strong dynamic (latent) General, Education Minimalistic, Lexical Scoping
Smalltalk object-oriented, concurrent programming, event-driven programming, imperative programming, declarative programming Yes

, ANSI

strong safe implicit dynamic Application, Education Uniformity, Pure object oriented
Tcl imperative programming, procedural programming, event-driven programming No dynamic Application, Scripting
Visual Basic component-oriented programming, event-driven programming No strong safe nominative static Application Rapid application development, Simplicity
Visual Basic .NET object-oriented, event-driven programming No strong static Application Rapid application development, Simplicity
Windows PowerShell imperative programming, object-oriented, functional programming, pipeline programming, reflective programming No strong safe implicit dynamic
Language Paradigm(s) Standarized Type strength Type safety Expression of types Type Compatability Type checking Intended use Design goals
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX
DIVBOX

a

Non-existant link"

Math

Doesn't work ....

c

blah

''blaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa this looks horrible aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa we should fix this somehow aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah''
''blah''


#Your Language Here


#Python <Python> def avr24(data):

   if len(data)==0:
       return 0
   else:
       return sum(data)/float(len(data))

</Python>

XFeeds

<xfeeds contentcolour="#eeeeee" feedlimit="3" totallimit="10"> http://blog.rosettacode.org/?feed=rss2 http://blog.rosettacode.org/?feed=comments-rss2 </xfeeds>

Syntax highlighting

<c>#include <iostream>

  1. include <gmpxx.h>

mpf_class f(mpf_class x); double f(double x);

int main() {

unsigned int start = 1;
unsigned int end = 1000;
mpf_class sum = 0;
double dsum = 0;

for( unsigned int x = start;
  x <= end;
  ++x   )
{
 sum += f(mpf_class(x));
 dsum += f((double) x);
}

std::cout << "Sum of f(x) from " << start << " to " << end << " is " << sum << " (GMP float) or " << dsum << " (IEEE 64-bit float)" <<  std::endl;
return 0;

}


mpf_class f(mpf_class x) {

return ( 1 / ( x * x ) );

}

double f(double x) {

return ( 1 / ( x * x ) );

} </c>

Expression test

Currently there are 2,649 articles, but if someone added another, there would be 2650 articles. Totally, there are 20,468 pages, which means that 17819 pages are not articles.

Your Language Here

Works with: Yourlanguagehere

Testing a standard language solution header.

Works with: Yourlanguagehere version 2.5
Works with: Display name version 2.5

Your Language Here

Testing a standard language solution header with different display name.



Animated FIFO

colorForth

source
colorForth
code

26 →

170 ¬

224-234 αßΓπΣσµτΦΘΩ

236 ∞

241-243 ±≥≤


244 ⌠

245 ⌡


246 ÷

247 ≈

248 °

251 √

253 ²

<sub> normalsub

<sup> normalsup