Talk:Closure (computer science): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Richard Pinch (→Title: new section) |
imported>Pat Palmer mNo edit summary |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Should the title not be ''Closure (computer science)'' (ie brackets) or possibly ''Closure (computer programming)''? [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] 22:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | Should the title not be ''Closure (computer science)'' (ie brackets) or possibly ''Closure (computer programming)''? [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] 22:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
:Done. I think we should probably move all the programming languages to brackets - ie. "Java (programming language)" instead of "Java programming language". When I talk to my programmer friends, I don't say "I was hacking away in Python programming language", I say "I was hacking away in Python". Bracket omission is a big problem in the [[CZ:Computers Workgroup]] and I think we need to remedy it. --[[User:Tom Morris|Tom Morris]] 22:16, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
::Gosh that was quick! Thanks, [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] 22:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
::Actually, I think that we only need the brackets when there is disambiguation. I can't think of any reason why someone would need to distinguish between "Objective C (programming language" and any other kind of thing named "Objective C". The same is true for plenty of programming languages - JavaScript, FORTRAN, COBOL, Ada, PHP, ASP.NET, C++, C#, BCPL, LISP, Smalltalk, Clojure - well, the list goes on. There will be some programming languages that need disambiguation - Python, Java, Ruby - but I don't see any reason why we need to title a page "JavaScript programming language" rather than just "JavaScript". We don't have "Thomas Jefferson founding father" or "Spain country". I'll put this on [[CZ:Computers Workgroup]]'s talk page and in the forum. The "programming language" thing is a hang-over from Wikipedia - and I don't know why they did it there either. Perhaps the only reason I can think of is that one might want to distinguish, say, "Ruby (language)" from "Ruby (interpreter)" - but there are plenty of people who use languages like Ruby, Python and Java and don't need to affix "programming language" on the end of the word to make themselves clear when they are talking about the language vs. the interpreter/compiler, platform etc. You'd just have a page called something like [[Java Virtual Machine]] or [[Java compilers]] or whatever. --[[User:Tom Morris|Tom Morris]] 22:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Reminder to whomever works on this next == | |||
It's worth quoting, somewhere in the article, what the iconic book [[Design Patterns]] said about complex features (such as closures) in programming languages, a warning of sorts. Also, some code examples would be helpful, especially in Javascript since lots of people don't realize it has them.[[User:Pat Palmer|Pat Palmer]] ([[User talk:Pat Palmer|talk]]) 23:16, 11 August 2020 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 17:16, 11 August 2020
Title
Should the title not be Closure (computer science) (ie brackets) or possibly Closure (computer programming)? Richard Pinch 22:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Done. I think we should probably move all the programming languages to brackets - ie. "Java (programming language)" instead of "Java programming language". When I talk to my programmer friends, I don't say "I was hacking away in Python programming language", I say "I was hacking away in Python". Bracket omission is a big problem in the CZ:Computers Workgroup and I think we need to remedy it. --Tom Morris 22:16, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Gosh that was quick! Thanks, Richard Pinch 22:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, I think that we only need the brackets when there is disambiguation. I can't think of any reason why someone would need to distinguish between "Objective C (programming language" and any other kind of thing named "Objective C". The same is true for plenty of programming languages - JavaScript, FORTRAN, COBOL, Ada, PHP, ASP.NET, C++, C#, BCPL, LISP, Smalltalk, Clojure - well, the list goes on. There will be some programming languages that need disambiguation - Python, Java, Ruby - but I don't see any reason why we need to title a page "JavaScript programming language" rather than just "JavaScript". We don't have "Thomas Jefferson founding father" or "Spain country". I'll put this on CZ:Computers Workgroup's talk page and in the forum. The "programming language" thing is a hang-over from Wikipedia - and I don't know why they did it there either. Perhaps the only reason I can think of is that one might want to distinguish, say, "Ruby (language)" from "Ruby (interpreter)" - but there are plenty of people who use languages like Ruby, Python and Java and don't need to affix "programming language" on the end of the word to make themselves clear when they are talking about the language vs. the interpreter/compiler, platform etc. You'd just have a page called something like Java Virtual Machine or Java compilers or whatever. --Tom Morris 22:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Reminder to whomever works on this next
It's worth quoting, somewhere in the article, what the iconic book Design Patterns said about complex features (such as closures) in programming languages, a warning of sorts. Also, some code examples would be helpful, especially in Javascript since lots of people don't realize it has them.Pat Palmer (talk) 23:16, 11 August 2020 (UTC)