As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I'm interested in Domain Specific Languagess design and implementation.
Much of the DSLs that I know stem from the academic world.
Can you give me some pointers to DSLs that are actually used in the industry ? and that you use on a daily-basis...which are really convenient..
(I'm interested in declarative languages too, but not really xml-based ones...)...
I'd like to establish a (non-exhaustive) list of industry-deployed languages...i know this is huge...
Sometimes, I'm implementing using a General Purpose Language things that could be trivially done using a DSL.
EDIT
I'm mainly interested in application-directed DSLs, not small-embedded languages. For instance, SQL matches what I'm looking for but SQL embedded in java does not interest me.
Another example of the kind of language i'm looking for is X#
A DSL that's so succesful that it got its own SO tag is the regex language. Specific to the domain of string pattern matching, of course.
Another popular one, but with which I have no experience is VHDL. VHDLs popularity stems from the fact that it's easily converted for use in an FPGA.
[edit]
While it's certainly not Turing complete, C's printf() format specifier can be considered as another domain-specific language.
NMake, MSBuild, lex, yacc, bison, flex, TeX, PostScript, XAML, SSIS, Wix
EBNF is probably the most widely-used domain specific language within its domain - a language to describe languages.
Wikipedia suggests that spreadsheet formulas and shell scripts are both domain specific languages. This would make them probably the most wide spread examples.
Awk provides is a domain specific language for the processing of semi structured textual data.
Many of the more powerful unix command line tools in wide spread use such as find and grep could be classed as having a domain specific language (even when limited solely to command line arguments)
I don't know if you want to consider graphical DSLs as well. I'd include
NORMA, a DSL for conceptual domain modeling, based on Object-Role Modeling notation (ORM2)
Web Service Software Factory, which uses three DSLs to model web services
Both of the above were created using the DSL Toolkit.
Here is a question I had asked about DSLs written in Ruby: Ruby DSL (Domain Specific Language) repositories, examples
Aside from Ruby DSLs, SQL is a fine example of a very popular DSL, as is AWK.
MEL (Maya Expression Language) is a command line-esque language that AutoDesk Maya uses throughout its entire design. The Maya Ascii file format that scenes can be saved in uses MEL to compose its scenes. The user interface is largely built and controlled using MEL scripts. The expressions you can use to drive channels and attributes on objects are MEL.
I suppose it could technically be considered an embedded language in cases where you're just writing scripts for it. However, without MEL, Maya basically wouldn't exist. No ascii file format, no user interface, etc.
You can write a domain specific language in languages like Boo, but I think the very definition of domain specific indicates that most of the time it will be in a specific industry or even just a single company...
Wikipedia has a good introductory article on this.
This overview has an examples section with some good links.
There are parts of ruby on rails that can be considered domain-specific languages. In particular its language for specifying relational tables.
Mak Stealth's language for programming charcter behaviors (Do not think it has a name)
Slang - Goldman Sachs language (I've heard of it but never used it)
CMS-2 Navy programming language
Google's web search supports some increasingly sophisticated parametrization
You could argue that this is one of the most widely used DSL's if even a small fraction of their userbase ever uses one of them as opposed to the standard list of words.
Erlang was originally a telecom-specific language, although it is now (occasionally) used as a general-purpose language.
The two (not already mentionned) which have impressed me most are:
OpenSCAD for solid 3D modelling
TaskJuggler for project management (!)
I'm a big fan of declarative DSLs. Operational DSLs (like Maple, Mathematica and R are nice too, but not that different from conventional langauges).
Tcl is a language that was originally designed to be a framework for building DSLs — providing basic functionality like programmability and I/O while the domain-specific parts were created fresh for each application — and which grew up into a generic scripting language. One of the more widely known Tcl-based DSLs is Expect.
For business processes we have e.g.
BPEL which is expressed in XML and is executable
BPMN which is a visual language and is used for modeling
Related
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 12 years ago.
What's the best language (in terms of simplicity, readability and code elegancy) in your opinion, to learn and work with metaprogramming?
I think metaprogramming is the "future of coding". Not saying that code will extinct, but we can see this scenario coming on new technologies.
First -- I don't think I agree with your claim that "metaprogramming is the 'future of coding'". It's a great tool, but not everybody likes it (for example, the Java designers left macros out of the language intentionally -- not that I like Java, but people do have reasons to object to metaprogramming).
Anyway...
I can think of two different ways of doing metaprogramming: on the syntatic level and at runtime.
For syntax metaprogramming, I think Scheme is a good option (if you hadn't mentioned simplicity etc I'd suggest Common Lisp).
For runtime metaprogramming I guess both Prolog and Smalltalk are very interesting. (You can add, change and remove facts to a Prolog database on the fly; and you can change Smalltalk objects on the fly to). You can probably do runtime metaprogramming in Ruby too, but I don't know Ruby.
So --there are several different metaprogramming methods in Scheme (different macro systems). I suggest you take a look at some basic Scheme book and later read about two different macro systems.
Some good Scheme books:
Simply Scheme
Teach Yourself Scheme
Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
Scheme implementations are very different from each other, so you'll also use your Scheme implementation manual a lot too.
Some places to learn about Scheme macros:
http://www.lispforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=100
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-metaprog2.html
http://chicken.wiki.br/explicit-renaming-macros
If you decide to use a language that's larger and messier than Scheme, try Common Lisp. There are three books that I'd suggest:
First, "Practical Common Lisp" by Peter seibel. That will get you started on Common Lisp and macros;
Second, "On Lisp" by Paul Graham. You'll then learn that macros are more powerful than what you had thought before, and will learn really nice techniques;
Third, "Let Over Lambda" by Doug Hoyte. An advanced book, best read after Graham's On Lisp.
For Prolog, you can read "Programming in Prolog" by Clocksin and Mellish (get the latest edition!) and later move on to "Prolog Programing in Depth" by Covington, Vellino and Nute. See chapter 6.
There are lots of good Smalltalk books. I like "The Art and Science of Smalltalk" by Simon Lewis.
There's a very nice free tutorial/primer by Canol Gokel about Smalltalk too (but it doesn't go as far as teaching metaprogramming).
What do you mean by metaprogramming? Metaprogramming is a set of concepts, rather than one specific technique.
See this answer where I've listed various concepts and related languages. Here is a summary:
Metaprogramming with macro --> Lisp
Metaprogramming with DSL --> Many languages for internal DSL, external DSL is more tricky
Reflection --> Smalltalk, Ruby
Annotations --> Java
Byte-code or AST transformation --> Groovy
See the complete answer for more details. Generally speaking, I think that a good OO all-rounder is Ruby. Otherwise any Lisp-like is will do the job: it's like putty in your hands. But that will depend on what you want to do...
The Lisps are pretty much the language of choice for a wide variety of metaprogramming techniques. Of the modern Lisps available, I would recommend Clojure as a more accessible Lisp that has access to a positively HUGE library (anything in Java land) if you want something that is both powerful and immediately useful.
For other approaches to metaprogramming almost any functional language will do the trick. Haskell is a good choice for learning techniques and functional programming but isn't what I'd call the most practical language to do real work in at this time. Erlang is more practical, but not quite as amenable to metaprogramming. OCaml is another possible choice but suffers a bit on the practicality front as well. It is more accessible than Haskell in many regards, however.
In the scripting language world Ruby is a language in which metaprogramming is a popular technique. Its approach is vaguely Lisp-like, but with a far more conventional syntax. It lacks the full power and flexibility of the Lisps, however, but on the other hand, with the exception of Clojure above, it has a lot more immediate practical utility.
Ruby has very powerful and flexible metaprogramming capabilities.
There are several languages that I would recommend for studying meta-programing.
The first is Prolog. A Prolog program is a database. Prolog "code", the clauses, are part of the data. The program can read them, including their content. It can also generate new code as a data structure and assert it, thus changing itself on run-time. All of this without using term expansion, which is Prolog's smart macros system. Some Prolog AI books start with implementing a meta-interpreter in Prolog, and then changing it by need.
The second is, as mentioned, Lisp, and particularly CLOS (Common List Object System), which includes commands for meta-OOP.
Finally, Python support a nice and not too obscure mechanism for run-time meta-programming, which is it's meta-classes (classes that create classes).
I'm surprised no one has mentioned ML. ML stands for Meta Language. so... yeah... CaML is a standard implementation. (OCaML, which JUST MY correct OPINIO mentioned is the OO version of CaML, which probably adds features that make the meta-programming less obvious...)
Other than that, I am a big fan of Scheme, but pretty much any Functional programming language is good for this... There's always the Little Lisper, er, sorry, the Little Schemer...
Don't know if we have the same definition of "meta programming" but there is certainly not ONE best language to learn. I would propose that you have a deeper look at functional programming. Which language to choose for that depends on your background and working environment. I would choose F# at the moment, but Haskel should also be a good choice.
cheers,
Achim
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
Is there a general list of what different programming languages are used to solve different scenarios?
like C is also used in embedded programming,kernel programming,UI programming too(GTK).
C++ is also used for desktop/sever application programming and also business/enterprise applications which sit on the desktop/server or even the web, and also to make computer games
Java is also used for almost anything. same with .Net
Scripting languages are used widely in administrative tasks and web scripting too.
this is my general idea of most languages (excluding functional languages)
can someone correct me and post a precise list of what programming languages can/are used to solve different and most general and common problems across different domains in the IT industry?
These are stereotyped and oversimplified, but:
Assembly and C: embedded programming, OS programming
C++: OS programming, native GUI apps, games
Objective-C: Mac OS programming, iPhone apps
Java and C#: enterprise web services and web apps
PHP: web apps
Ruby/Python/Perl: scripting, web apps
Fortran/Matlab: mathematical and scientific apps
Erlang: high-concurrency network and telecom apps
Scala/F#/Clojure: functional languages, some initial attempts made for business and web apps
COBOL: business apps (yeah, still to this day...)
Prolog: artificial intelligence
Lisp: artificial intelligence (and according to some fans of the language, all of the above)
The best language depends on how you are modeling the solution, as some models just work better with objects, so an OOP would be best, some would best be done in a iterative solution and so on.
So, you either pick a language or you design the solution first, in some language-agnostic solution, such as using some of the UML diagrams.
Either way will create some constraints, and then you do the other part with the constraints imposed by the first one.
You can do basically any problem with any complete language, but some languages are just a better fit, but, again, it depends on the problem solution and how you model the solution.
Any list will be very subjective based on a very important constraint, your familiarity with that language.
But, you will find LISP in robots, for example, as well as in the scripting part of Autocad.
Smalltalk has been used a great deal in the financial industries, from what I have heard.
If speed and size is important then C or C++ is probably the best choice, such as in embedded systems, like dsps.
PHP and Perl, as well as Python have found uses in scripting for sysadmin tasks, but these are also used in many other areas.
You pick a problem and several languages, and I can give a design that will work for that problem, but the solutions will be very different.
It gets more interesting now since we have languages that cross paradigms, so, Java and AOP can solve problems better than just Java by itself. F# and Scala are hybrid languages, so they are both functional and OOP. Javascript can be a functional language, even though it is prototypical by design, but you can pretend to be OOP.
Most languages can cover a wide range of tasks, just with varying degrees of aptitude.
It is the corner cases which define a programming language. To find out which language is specialized for what, you'd have to see each language's website, or wikipedia article.
Scheme for instance, is a dialect of Lisp used in mathematics, because the syntax (and language extensions) are geared towards such use. That doesn't mean it can't do other things, it just means it's really really good at that.
This a somewhat unanswerable question. There is no definitive list of what a language is good for and not good for. Part of this is because language use drives new features in the language, and though some languages have constructs and syntaxes geared towards a certain "perspective" on a problem that does not prevent them from solving other problems.
In addition what defines a language? You listed several but what about SQL, ActionScript, CSS, HTML, etc? Some are not languages but they are used as such and the line is blurring pretty quickly.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
In every technical publication, and on this site too, people are always comparing OO languages to Smalltalk. My experience is in Java: is Smalltalk so important that I should study it?
Smalltalk was one of the earliest object-oriented (OO) languages (with others like Simula and Eiffel) and can be said to be extremely "pure" in an OO sense:
Everything is an object and objects are only communicated with via the sending of messages
No primitives (no ints, booleans etc)
No control structures (no for, while, if etc). Sounds impossible but it's true!
No statics
It also pioneered some other, now common, stuff:
the virtual machine (and JIT compilation)
Debugging by inspection
"Hotswapping" running code
the modern IDE
Closures
Duck typing
Model-View Controller (MVC) architecture for UIs
Test-driven development (TDD) and agile methodology
And there are other things connected with Smalltalk which didn't really make it into the mainstream:
"Image"-based system rather than file-based.
Object-oriented databases
And it's fair to say that the Java collections API and the apache-commons collections API are heavily influenced by Smalltalk.
I wouldn't say that you should learn Smalltalk per se, but a familiarity with the fundamentals of these features (now present in many other languages) is surely advantageous to you.
Note that there are currently only 123 questions on here about the language, which was originally intended as an educational language (i.e. aimed at children) by its creator, Alan Kay. It is not particularly heavily used anymore. That's not to say it isn't used. JPMorgan, for example, has a large exotic derivatives risk-management system written in it.
Smalltalk has many brilliant innovations - things we're all taking for granted today, including:
being the first ever IDE
providing programmatic support for a GUI with a mouse If you learn Smalltalk GUI programming, you really will have understood MVC properly.
being built out of a small number of powerful ideas that work together extremely well
The Smalltalk way isn't to crash out on unexpected behaviour - it's to adapt. If you send a message to an object that doesn't understand it, the debugger comes up and invites you to write that method... so it provides excellent support for incremental development.
The IDE, the app that you're writing and your data are all part of the same system - so you can write your own tools and debug instrumentation far more easily.
The TDD toolset in Smalltalk is still better than any other language (see below).
Squeak Smalltalk has quite a bit of cutting-edge design research:
the morphic UI - you can get familiar with the concept of "liveness"
the seaside web framework - learn what a continuation server is and how it's radically different
Squeak has a strong connection with the OLPC software (one laptop per child) project - and could yet have a big influence on the world.
Find out what a "trait" is...
Play with the radical 3D immersive environment called Open Croquet.
Because Smalltalk is a smaller, simpler and more consistent language, with it's own built-in environment it's a much less confusing place to start teaching OOP. People who go this route end up being better Java, Ruby and C# programmers because they can learn basic OOP without all the messy inconsistencies of mainstream languages.
Some commercial Smalltalks have amazing, multi-node distributed OO database environments. I'm thinking about Gemstone.
Want to know the difference between Model-View-Controller and Model-View-Presenter - look at Dolphin Smalltalk...
The single most important reason to learn Smalltalk today is that extreme programming and scrum both got invented in the Smalltalk community... and the highly interactive style of programming you experience in Smalltalk is simpler, more powerful and direct than anything you can do with Java or C# or Ruby... and you can't really understand how well agile methods can work until you've tried to do extreme programming in Smalltalk. Few other languages (no mainstream ones anyway) have a comparable feature set.
... to really understand what TDD can be you need to use SUnit. JUnit just shows you where your tests failed. SUnit actually allows you click into the debugger at the point where the test failed and see the actual objects and how they're connected so you can see, live in the debugger how the code failed and fix it right there.
Yes, Smalltalk is so important you should study it. Why? You can understand object-oriented programming in pure, simple form. What people forget is that the Smalltalk-80 "Blue Book" has only about 90 pages devoted to the language—the language is just that simple. The other 300 pages talk about the predefined class hierarchy, which is a masterpiece of design for a class-based, object-oriented language that uses single inheritance. You will get a much deeper understanding of objects (e.g., classes are objects, and they have metaclasses, and so on off to infinity... except the knot is carefully tied to keep the system finite) than you would ever get from studying a hybrid language like Java or C++. Smalltalk matters not just because of its history but because of its simplicity:
Simple enough so you can understand the entire language and the libraries
Shows one idea (objects are all you need) pushed to its logical extreme
Everybody has something to learn from Smalltalk!
Smalltalk is one of the first two original OOP languages, the other being Simula-67. Consequently, there are two large families - the statically typed model centered around method invocation, pioneered by Simula (C++, Java, C# all belong here), and the dynamically typed model centered around message passing, pioneered by Smalltalk (Python, Ruby belong here).
Today, Smalltalk isn't particularly important on its own - there are some people still using it to write stuff, but it's definitely not mainstream. Learning it will give you some insight in how and why OOP evolved, however.
I spent about 5 minutes in a presentation at a conference last month on Smalltalk's history and influence. See Image-based development with Smalltalk. One of the more foreign concepts to today's programmers is the "image-based" development. There are some good analogies, including a DBMS and a spreadsheet.
Yes. Download the seaside one-click image, start using it with the tutorial from James Foster and you will learn at least:
how web applications should be build
how debugging is supposed to work
I agree with the others. I'm not sure if it's important per se, but it is COOL (imho).
I love that there are no loops or conditionals in the language. If-then-else is a message sent to a boolean object. Objects of type True do one thing, objects of type False do another. (Yes, True and False are subtypes of Boolean, with a single value each, true and false respectively).
It starts out being kind of counter-intuitive, but it does give you a very interesting, and deep, view of how OO programming should work...
Not only was it one of the first, Smalltalk remains to this day a paragon of OO language design. The more popular languages that came later — C++, Java, even Objective-C — all have more primitive object-orientation and are more restrictive than good old Smalltalk. Smalltalk had pervasive first-class objects, great support for runtime introspection, very natural use of duck typing and closures that worked better than I've seen in any non-functional language. I mean, we're talking about a language that had no native control structures (if, while, etc.) but was able to create them out of its object system in a way that worked seamlessly. How cool is that?
I wouldn't recommend Smalltalk for any intensive desktop app development these days (there just isn't a viable implementation IMO), but if you want to see how OO was meant to be and maybe pick up some ideas you can use in your apps, Smalltalk is a great place to look.
If you only know one object-oriented language you should consider learning a second and a third and a fourth in order to gain a broader perspective on programming with objects. Learning Smalltalk will stretch your brain because a lot of the familiar concepts we're used to in other languages (e.g. if-then-else, for(;;), while(), etc) are not there in Smalltalk. There are equivalents, obviously, but Smalltalk does things differently, and learning about different ways to do things is always a good idea.
Good luck.
I've just started to revive my interest in Smalltalk, and in my opinion, there are a few compelling things that are special about Smalltalk:
Highly productive development
environment
Built-in support for Agile/Extreme
programming methodologies
"Pure" object model
Easy to use graphics framework
None of these make it especially useful for people who are not in the software development business. My first exposure to it was when I saw a user interface for an embedded device prototyped on a PC using Smalltalk. This allowed the user interface to be modified and tested very quickly, and when completed, provided the embedded developers an "executable specification" that was far more precise than any document. I'm surprised I haven't seen this technique used far more often than I've observed in my travels during the last 20 years.
Using Smalltalk as a prototyping tool is where my interest lies: I think that given a new problem, different approaches to solving it can be tried and validated very quickly and easily in a Smalltalk environment, and once the desired solution is found it should be relatively mechanical to convert it to Java/C++/C# etc. etc. In fact, for repetitive sorts of things, it might well be possible to use Smalltalk to generate code for parts of the solution in some other target language.
The other thing about SmallTalk is that its alumni include Kent Beck and Ward Cunningham. Their work with SmallTalk spawned automated xUnit testing, software design patterns, CRC Cards and other practices which ed into XP/Agile, etc. So it could be argued that SmallTalk has been a major contributor to the modern programming landscape.
Just two comments:
Smalltalk is not object "oriented", is real objects, only objects and messages in the environment.
Smalltalk is not a language, is an environment that has a language (of the same name), but most of the "magic" here is thanks to the environment (the image).
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
There is a lot of hype around Haskell, however, it is hard to get information on how it is used in the real world applications. What are the most popular projects / usages of Haskell and why it excels at solving these problems?
What are some common uses for this
language?
Rapid application development.
If you want to know "why Haskell?", then you need to consider advantages of functional programming languages (taken from https://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AdvantagesOfFunctionalProgramming):
Functional programs tend to be much more terse than their ImperativeLanguage counterparts. Often this leads to enhanced
programmer productivity
FP encourages quick prototyping. As such, I think it is the best software design paradigm for ExtremeProgrammers... but what do I know?
FP is modular in the dimension of functionality, where ObjectOrientedProgramming is modular in the dimension of different
components.
The ability to have your cake and eat it. Imagine you have a complex OO system processing messages - every component might make state
changes depending on the message and then forward the message to some
objects it has links to. Wouldn't it be just too cool to be able to
easily roll back every change if some object deep in the call
hierarchy decided the message is flawed? How about having a history of
different states?
Many housekeeping tasks made for you: deconstructing data structures (PatternMatching), storing variable bindings (LexicalScope with
closures), strong typing (TypeInference), GarbageCollection, storage
allocation, whether to use boxed (pointer-to-value) or unboxed (value
directly) representation...
Safe multithreading! Immutable data structures are not subject to data race conditions, and consequently don't have to be protected by
locks. If you are always allocating new objects, rather than
destructively manipulating existing ones, the locking can be hidden in
the allocation and GarbageCollection system.
Apart from this Haskell has its own advantages such as:
Clear, intuitive syntax inspired by mathematical notation.
List comprehensions to create a list based on existing lists.
Lambda expressions: create functions without giving them explicit names. So it's easier to handle big formulas.
Haskell is completely referentially transparent. Any code that uses I/O must be marked as such. This way, it encourages you to separate code with side effects (e.g. putting text on the screen) from code without (calculations).
Lazy evaluation is a really nice feature:
Even if something would usually cause an error, it will still work as long as you don't use the result. For example, you could put 1 / 0 as the first item of a list and it will still work if you only used the second item.
It is easier to write search programs such as this sudoku solver because it doesn't load every combination at once—it just generates them as it goes along. You can do this in other languages, but only Haskell does this by default.
You can check out following links:
https://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AdvantagesOfFunctionalProgramming
https://learn.microsoft.com/archive/blogs/wesdyer/why-functional-programming-is-important-in-a-mixed-environment
https://web.archive.org/web/20160626145828/http://blog.kickino.org/archives/2007/05/22/T22_34_16/
https://useless-factor.blogspot.com/2007/05/advantage-of-functional-programming.html
I think people in this post are missing the most important point for anyone who has never used a functional programming language: expanding your mind. If you are new to functional programming then Haskell will make you think in ways you've never thought before. As a result your programming in other areas and other languages will improve. How much? Hard to quantify.
There is one good answer for what a general purpose language like Haskell is good for: writing programs in general.
For what it is used for in practice, I've three approaches to establishing that:
A tag cloud of Haskell library and app areas, weighted by frequency on Hackage.
Indicates that it is good for graphics, networking, systems programming, data structures, databases, development, text processing ...
Areas it is used in industry - a lot of DSLs, web apps, compiler design, networking, analysis, systems programming , ...
And finally, my opinion on what it is really strong at:
Problems where correctness matters, domain specific languages, and parallel and concurrent programming
I hope that gives you a sense on how broad your question is, if it is to be answered with any specificity.
One example of Haskell in action is xmonad, a "featureful window manager in less than 1200 lines of code".
From the Haskell Wiki:
Haskell has a diverse range of use
commercially, from aerospace and
defense, to finance, to web startups,
hardware design firms and lawnmower
manufacturers. This page collects
resources on the industrial use of
Haskell.
According to Wikipedia, the Haskell language was created out of the need to consolidate existing functional languages into a common one which could be used for future research in functional-language design.
It is apparent based on the information available that it has outgrown it's original purpose and is used for much more than research. It is now considered a general purpose functional programming language.
If you're still asking yourself, "Why should I use it?", then read the Why use it? section of the Haskell Wiki Introduction.
Haskell is a general purpose programming language. It can be used for anything you use any other language to do. You aren't limited by anything but your own imagination. As for what it's suited for? Well, pretty much everything. There are few tasks in which a functional language does not excel.
And yes, I'm the Rayne from Dreamincode. :)
I would also like to mention that, in case you haven't read the Wikipedia page, functional programming is a paradigm like Object Oriented programming is a paradigm. Just in case you didn't know. Haskell is also functional in the sense that it works; it works quite well at that.
Just because a language isn't an Object Oriented language doesn't mean the language is limited by anything. Haskell is a general-purpose programming language, and is just as general purpose as Java.
I have a cool one, facebook created a automated tool for rewriting PHP code. They parse the source into an abstract syntax tree, do some transformations:
if ($f == false) -> if (false == $f)
I don't know why, but that seems to be their particular style and then they pretty print it.
https://github.com/facebook/lex-pass
We use haskell for making small domain specific languages. Huge amounts of data processing. Web development. Web spiders. Testing applications. Writing system administration scripts. Backend scripts, which communicate with other parties. Monitoring scripts (we have a DSL which works nicely together with munin, makes it much easier to write correct monitor code for your applications.)
All kind of stuff actually. It is just a everyday general purpose language with some very powerful and useful features, if you are somewhat mathematically inclined.
From Haskell:
Haskell is a standardized, general-purpose purely functional
programming language, with
non-strict semantics and strong static
typing. It is named after logician
Haskell Curry.
Basically Haskell can be used to create pretty much anything you would normally create using other general-purpose languages (e.g. C#, Java, C, C++, etc.).
For example, for developing interactive, realtime HTML5 web applications. See Elm, the compiler of which is implemented in Haskell and the syntax of which borrows a lot from Haskell's.
This is a pretty good source for info about Haskell and its uses:
Open Source Haskell Releases and Growth
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
Locked. This question and its answers are locked because the question is off-topic but has historical significance. It is not currently accepting new answers or interactions.
I'm interested in compilers, interpreters and languages.
What is the most interesting, but forgotten or unknown, language you know about? And more importantly, why?
I'm interested both in compiled, interpreted and VM languages, but not esoteric languages like Whitespace or BF. Open source would be a plus, of course, since I plan to study and hopefully learn from it.
I love compilers and VMs, and I love Lua.
Lua is not as well supported as many other scripting languages, but from a mindset like yours I'm sure you will fall in love with Lua too. I mean it's like lisp, (can do anything lisp can as far as I know), has lots of the main features from ADA, plus it's got meta programming built right in, with functional programming and object oriented programming loose enough to make any type of domain language you might want. Besides the VM's code is simple C which means you can easily dig right into it to appreciate even at that level.
(And it's open-source MIT license)
I am a fan of the D programming language. Here is a wikipedia article and and intro from the official site.
Some snippets from the wikipedia article:
The D programming language, also known simply as D, is an object-oriented, imperative, multiparadigm system programming language by Walter Bright of Digital Mars. It originated as a re-engineering of C++, but even though it is predominantly influenced by that language, it is not a variant of C++. D has redesigned some C++ features and has been influenced by concepts used in other programming languages, such as Java, C# and Eiffel. A stable version, 1.0, was released on January 2, 2007. An experimental version, 2.0, was released on June 17, 2007.
on features:
D is being designed with lessons learned from practical C++ usage rather than from a theoretical perspective. Even though it uses many C/C++ concepts it also discards some, and as such is not strictly backward compatible with C/C++ source code. It adds to the functionality of C++ by also implementing design by contract, unit testing, true modules, garbage collection, first class arrays, associative arrays, dynamic arrays, array slicing, nested functions, inner classes, closures[2], anonymous functions, compile time function execution, lazy evaluation and has a reengineered template syntax. D retains C++'s ability to do low-level coding, and adds to it with support for an integrated inline assembler. C++ multiple inheritance is replaced by Java style single inheritance with interfaces and mixins. D's declaration, statement and expression syntax closely matches that of C++.
I guess a lot depends on what you mean by 'non-mainstream'.
Would lisp count as non-mainstream?
I would suggest having a look at Erlang - it's been getting a bit of press recently, so some of the learning resources are excellent. If you've used OO and/or procedural languages, Erlang will definitely bend your mind in new and exciting ways.
Erlang is a pure functional language, with ground-up support for concurrent, distributed and fault-tolerant programs. It has a number of interesting features, including the fact that variables aren't really variables at all - they cannot be changed once declared, and are in fact better understood as a form of pattern.
There is some talk around the blogosphere about building on top of the Erlang platform (OTP) and machine support for other languages like Ruby - Erlang would then become a kind of virtual machine for running concurrent apps, which would be a pretty exciting possibility.
I've recently fallen in love with Ocaml and functional languages in general.
Ocaml, for instance, offers the best of all possible worlds. You get code that compiles to executable native machine language as fast as C, or universally portable byte code. You get an interpreter to bring REPL-speed to development. You get all the power of functional programming to produce perfectly orthogonal structures, deep recursion, and true polymorphism. Atop all of this is support for Object-Orientation, which in the context of a functional language that already provides everything OOP promises (encapsulation, modularization, orthogonal functions, and polymorphic recyclability), means OOP that is forced to actually prove itself.
Smalltalk (see discussion linked here). Sort of the grand-daddy of the dynamic languages (with the possible exception of Lisp and SNOBOL). Very nice to work with and sadly trampled by Java and now the newer languages like Python and Ruby.
FORTH was a language designed for low level code on early CPU's. Its most notable feature was RPN stack based math operations. The same type of math used on early HP calculators. For example 1+2+3+4= would be written as 1, 2, 3, 4, + , +, +
Haskell and REBOL are both fascinating languages, for very different reasons.
Haskell can really open your eyes as a developer, with concepts like monads, partial application, pattern matching, algebraic types, etc. It's a smorgasbord for the curious programmer.
REBOL is no slouch either. It's deceptively simple at first, but when you begin to delve into concepts like contexts, PARSE dialects, and Bindology, you realize there's much more than meets the eye. The nice thing about REBOL is that it's much easier to get started with it than with Haskell.
I can't decide which I like better.
Boo targets the .NET framework and is open source. Inspired by Python.
Try colorForth.
PROLOG is a rule-based language with back-track functionality. You can produce very human-readable (as in prosa) code.
I find constraint languages interesting, but it is hard to know what constitutes forgotten or unknown. Here are some languages I know about (this is certainly not an exhaustive list of any kind):
Ciao, YAP, SWI-Prolog, and GNU Prolog are all Prolog implementations. I think they are all open source. Ciao, gnu prolog, and probably the others also, as is common in Prolog implementations, support other constraint types. Integer programming for example.
Mozart and Mercury are both, as I understand it, alternative logic programming languages.
Alice is more in the ML family, but supports constraint programming using the GECODE C++ library.
Drifting a little bit off topic....
Maude is an interesting term rewrite language.
HOL and COQ are both mechanized proof systems which are commonly used in the languages community.
Lambda-the-Ultimate is a good place to talk about and learn more about programming languages.
I would have to say Scheme, especially in it's R6RS incarnation.
Modula-2 is the non-mainstream language that I've found most interesting. Looks mainstream, but doesn't quite work like what we're used to. Inherits a lot from Pascal, and yet is different enough to provide interesting learning possibilities.
Have a look at Io at http://www.iolanguage.com/
or Lisaac at: https://gna.org/projects/isaac/
or Self at: http://self.sourceforge.net/
or Sather (now absolutly forgotten)
or Eiffel http://www.eiffel.com
Why here are a few reasons. Io is absolutly minimalistic and does not even have "control flow elements" as syntacit entities. Lisaad is a follow-up to Eiffel with many simplifications AFAIKT. Self is a followup to Smalltalk and Io has taken quite alot from Self also. The base thing is that the distinction between Class and Object has been given up. Sather is a anwer to Eiffel with a few other rules and better support for functional programming (right from the start).
And Eiffel is definitly a hallmark for statically typed OO-languages. Eiffel was the first langauge whith support for Design by contract, generics (aka templates) and one of the best ways to handle inheritance. It was and is one of the simpler languages still. I for my part found the best libraries for Eiffel.....
It's creator just has one problem, he did not accept other contributions to the OO field.....
Regards
I recently learned of the existence of Icon from this question.
I have since used it in answers to several questions. (1, 2, 3, 4)
It's interesting because of its evaluation strategy - it is the only imperative language I know that supports backtracking. It allows some nice succinct code for many things :)
Learning any language that requires you to rethink your programming habits is a must. A sure sign is the pace at which you skim through the documentation of a language's core (not library). Fast meaning fruitless here.
My short list would be, in my order of exposure and what were the concepts I learned from them:
Assembly, C: great for learning pointers and their arithmetic.
C++: same as C with an introduction to generics, as long as you can stand the incredibly verbose syntax.
Ruby/Lua: scripting languages, dynamically typed, writing bindings for existing C libraries.
Python/C#/Java: skipped, these languages look to me as a rehash of notions originating elsewhere with a huge standard library. Sure the whole packages are nice, but you won't learn new concepts here.
OCaml: type infererence done right, partial application, compiler infered genericity, immutability as a default, how to handle nulls elegantly.
Haskell: laziness by default, monads.
My €.02.
I can't believe Logo is so forgotten. Ok, it's Logo. Sort of like lisp, but with slightly uglier syntax. Although working with lists in Logo, one encounters the delightfully named 'butfirst' and 'butlast' operations. =P
ML. Learning it and using it forces you think differently about programming problems differently. It also grants one patience, in most cases. Most.
How about go? It's brand new, so it's unknown and not mainstream (yet).
It's interesting because the syntax looks like what happens after you put C and pascal into a jar and make 'em fight.
Well once it was called MUMPS but now its called InterSystems Caché
http://www.intersystems.com/cache/
First answer - Scheme. It's not too widely used, but definitely seems like a solid language to use, especially considering the robustness of DrScheme (which in fact compiles Scheme programs to native binary code).
After that - Haskell is incredibly interesting. It's a language which does lazy evaluation right, and the consequences are incredible (including such things as a one-line definition of the fibonnaci sequence).
Going more mainstream, Python is still not really widely accepted in the business circles, but it definitely should be, by now...
Ken Kahn's ToonTalk, a cartoon language with hard-core theoretic underpinnings:
http://www.toontalk.com/
Prograph: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prograph ... seems Prograph lives on as Marten:
http://andescotia.com/products/marten/
Self's IDE was/is a thing of beauty, talk about Flow (in the Csíkszentmihályi sense)...
Overall, though, I'd have to say Haskell is the most interesting, for the potential adavances in computing that it represents.
Harbour for dynamic type. Great opition to business apps.
Reia!
http://wiki.reia-lang.org/wiki/Reia_Programming_Language
It's Erlang made sense, it's beutifull and I'm in love. It's so unknown that it doesn't even have a wikipedia page!
The first major (non-BASIC) language that I learned was Dream Maker, from http://www.byond.com.
It's somewhat similar to C++ or Java, but it's largely pre-built for designing multiplayer online games. It's very much based on inheritance.
It's an intersting language especially as a starting language, it gets gratifying results quicker, and lets be honest, most people who are first learning to program are interested in one thing... games.
I find Factor, Oz and OCaml quite interesting. In fact, I have started using Factor for personal projects.
Rebol of course !
It's so simple but so powerfull learn it at http://reboltutorial.com
I've recently looked up a lot about Windows PowerShell.
While not necessarily just a language. It's an awesome shell that has a built-in scripting language. It's basically a super-beefed up command line shell.
Unlike Unix shells, where everything is string text (which definitely has it's benefits), PowerShell commands (cmdlets) use objects. It's based on the .Net framework so you guys who are familiar with that will have probably already figured out that anything PowerShell returns can be piped and the properties and methods of that object can be used. It's fun to say "everything is an object!" again just like when OOP was getting big.
Very neat stuff. For the first time, Windows is implementing some of the Unix command-line interface tools similar to grep and the whole bunch.
If you're interested in VMs, you should look at Parrot...There's a bunch of languages supported and that's pretty neat....
O'caml is a good language if you want to learn how to implement a compiler...