Post 9pX6CqlVz11BSK08rA by chucker@mastodon.social
(DIR) More posts by chucker@mastodon.social
(DIR) Post #9pWgerxcXEowSlMbg0 by codesections@fosstodon.org
2019-12-01T16:18:09Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
I'm slightly bemused by this Wikipedia article that lists programming languages in chronological order.According to the article, three of the five most recently released languages are C++, C, and Fortranhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_programming_languages#2010sNow, I get that it's referring to new *versions* of those languages released in the past year or two. But it's not like other languages haven't *also* released new versions/editions. So I'm still not sure what's up with the list.
(DIR) Post #9pWhZMkdFAquAtECGm by max@fosstodon.org
2019-12-01T16:27:25Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@codesections I dunno, seems pretty clear that it's, eh, C++17, C18, and Fortran 2018......which seems to beg why they have these "big year-tagged new versions" instead of something more understated like #semver
(DIR) Post #9pWisywHaOje4Jawvw by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2019-12-01T16:43:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@max @codesections Backwards-incompatibility, and retaining historical naming systems.
(DIR) Post #9pWqKzfj9aqm859hYG by rudolf@fosstodon.org
2019-12-01T18:06:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 @max @codesections You forgot Cobol2014 :)
(DIR) Post #9pWt2eHMFmssQihWFs by mdhughes@cybre.space
2019-12-01T18:36:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@codesections It lists K&R C in 1972, C90 in 1988-9, C99, C11, C18 in appropriate years.Now, what's annoying is it only lists Scheme in 1975, not the R[1-7]RS since then.
(DIR) Post #9pX5MVeZESL2v4nH0a by codesections@fosstodon.org
2019-12-01T20:54:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mdhughes > It lists K&R C in 1972, C90 in 1988-9, C99, C11, C18 in appropriate years. Now, what's annoying is it only lists Scheme in 1975, not the R[1-7]RS since then.Yeah, that's mostly what I'm getting at. It also doesn't list Rust 2018 (a major release) or JavaScript's ES6 (which, imo, basically transformed JS as a language). There's probably some logic to it, but it escapes me at the level of effort I'm willing to invest on causal curiosity.
(DIR) Post #9pX6CqlVz11BSK08rA by chucker@mastodon.social
2019-12-01T21:04:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@codesections @mdhughes I don’t think there’s much logic beyond “whoever edited this page likes C++ and doesn’t care about JS”
(DIR) Post #9pX6KaUmMGq3JPrYPY by mdhughes@cybre.space
2019-12-01T21:05:42Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@codesections Well, wikipedia is a bunch of kids role-playing as encyclopedia editors. So they know the stuff that's easy to find. If you want & know more, edit it yourself and then prepare for weeks or months of idiots vandalizing your changes.
(DIR) Post #9pXxclGqKWK9VvtZkO by katana_steel@mast.linuxgamecast.com
2019-12-02T07:02:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@codesectionsI do see the page seems it's fine to include language revisions for C,C++, Fortran, and suchBut looks like Java have been over looked (1.7 or just 7,1.8, 9, 10, 11, 13 etc. In recent times)