Talk:Idiomatically determine all the characters that can be used for symbols
What do you mean by "symbol"?
I have no clue what is meant by "symbol" here. To a semioticist, every character in the program is a symbol, and every meaningful group of characters is a symbol, and the entire program symbolizes the computation that will be performed when it is invoked. Most computer languages do not give a technical meaning to the term "symbol" (and those that do define it give differing definitions of it), but it feels as though a particular grammatical or cultural definition is being assumed here without explanation. RC entries should attempt to transcend cultural differences, not be trapped by them, so we either need to define specifically what is meant by "symbol" as a widely known concept of some sort, or find a less overloaded term that will communicate across differing computing cultures. Is "symbol" intended to be restricted to what other languages would call "identifiers"? Does it include operators or other action indicators? To us linguists, verbs are every bit as symbolic as nouns, and operators are just funny-looking verbs. On the other hand, if the intent is to use the term "symbol" as a sort of Rorschach blot for us to free associate from and interpret however we like, then that should be made clear too. It would not be the first RC task to take that approach. :-) --TimToady (talk) 17:14, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
- I would've thought you'd get a clue from the first example entered (REXX). I didn't want to confuse symbols with characters (or a group of characters) within a computer program. If every character is a symbol, then we could just use the word character. As I meant/used/inferred it, symbols can be names of something, mostly used for names of programs/functions/subroutines/routines (another name would be entry points, specifically, the names of entry points), variable names (or structures), names (maybe called labels or events) of things that can be signaled/invoked (or trapped), etc. More generally, names that computer programmers can choose, as opposed to names of things that the compiler writers (or the architects) have chosen. I know that isn't specific enough to please most people, maybe not even some people; but I had to jump in somewhere. It wasn't my intent to exclude any computer programming languages that didn't have all (or if any) of the classes/types of symbols, nor was it meant to be so defined that some computer programming languages would/might be excluded. This is the main reason I tried to not define the word specifically so it might become exclusive (or start a definition war). My background in computer programming is mostly old school (FORTRAN, PL/I, COBOL, BASIC, IBM mainframe assembler, REXX, etc) where symbols have a more traditional (and somewhat confined) usage and/or meaning and usually exclude things like operators, types of statements, and (action) verbs --- and there are others, of course. I realized before I entered this Rosetta Code task, this would be fraught with the possibility of not adequately defining what a symbol is, but then, it wouldn't ever have been entered since there wasn't a definition where one-size-fits-all (computer programming languages). As for defining what a symbol is, and if a computer programming language has other meanings for symbols that can be programmatically determined, then that can be shown/defined in the examples. We could hash this out forever (trying to define what a symbol is in this context), but I feel there will never be a consensus on any one (specific) definition that would cover all computer programming languages, at least, on one definition that can't be agreed on without a long back and forth discussion. However, if there is a term for what I envisioned, I'd like to know what it is. If you could iron one out, give it a try (now that you know what I meant to ask for). I don't want this to evolve into a detailed discussion on the grammatics of computer science terminology on symbolism or a debate on computer programming cultures. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 18:29, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
- If one computer programming language calls "them" identifiers, others call them names, others call them variables (variable names or names of variables, a miniscule difference), others yet call them labels ... What is needed is a term that can be understood by everyone what is meant. Tall order, but of which I have no clear term (or definition). -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 18:39, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
- I've added a general description of symbols to the task's requirement, I hope it's a start in the right direction (which is much better than reading my mind or viewing/decoding other examples). The phrase above Most computer languages do not give a technical meaning to the term "symbol" (and those that do define it give differing definitions of it), but ··· was my guideline, knowing full well that my attempt won't fare any better than give some (vague and/or general) description or examples. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 20:42, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
ooRexx is an Interpreter of Classic Rexx (and MUCH more)
A plea to Gerard Schildberger: Again and again you refuse to accept the fact that ooRexx is an interpreter that can perfectly process "classic" Rexx programs that obey a few (actually very few) restrictions. I added the modified program and its output to the Rexx section in order to make others aware of the difference. The program was actually also in Category ooRexx as you may have nodiced. Please reinstate my program instead of unjustly (re)moving it. --Walterpachl (talk) 19:52, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
- BTW: Version 2 under ooRexx makes absolutely no sense!!! Pleas remove it --Walterpachl (talk) 19:56, 12 September 2014 (UTC)