Ask a hundred people and you'll get a hundred different definitions of 'scripting language'.
Computer Science Canada Lots of Python talk lately |
| Author: | wtd [ Tue Sep 06, 2005 5:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Lots of Python talk lately |
I've noticed a fair amount of Python talk among compsci.ca members and I'm wondering if we could maybe extend the Ruby forums to include Python talk. Anyone interested in this? |
|
| Author: | Hikaru79 [ Tue Sep 06, 2005 8:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
How about turning the Ruby forum into a generic "Scripting Languages" forum that would encompass Ruby, Perl, Python, etc? |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Tue Sep 06, 2005 8:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
'Scripting language' is a controversial term, which does not necessarily describe these languages. Using it in this context would be, if nothing else, confusing. |
|
| Author: | rizzix [ Tue Sep 06, 2005 9:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
yes very true... but yet Python, Ruby and Perl are in fact quite commonly known as scripting languages... hmm well... i guess the original definition of a scripting language applied to any language that could replace the archaic shell script... i.e any language that supported the "#!/usr/bin/lang_interpreter" line.. but the meaning has changed over the years... now a scripting language is any lanuage that can be used within another language.. like the ones mentioned above and many more, including Sleep, Boo, and Groovy. Yep and i think having a generic scripting language section would be great.. but only if we adhere to the definition above (or something similar)... but we can have an exception to the rule: if language that has it's own sub-category, then posts relating to that language should be made within that subsection and not it the generic scripting-language section |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Tue Sep 06, 2005 9:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ask a hundred people and you'll get a hundred different definitions of 'scripting language'. |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Tue Sep 06, 2005 9:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
An alternative suggestion: 'Lightweight Languages'. |
|
| Author: | rizzix [ Tue Sep 06, 2005 10:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
how about (the more commonly used term) 'Agile Programming Languages' |
|
| Author: | wtd [ Tue Sep 06, 2005 10:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
That's a good one too. |
|