Template talk:Programming language comparisons

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

No c or c++ example! That is insane! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.164.165.114 (talk) 20:44, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

ABAP[edit]

Mentioning the almost-unknown and almost proprietary ABAP language here (the Comparison of ABAP and Java article says ABAP is used mostly inside SAP) is almost like advertisement. I think there are many other object oriented programming languages which could deserve such an honor. I'm thus removing that link from the table. --Blaisorblade (talk) 01:49, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. Though the article is right that ABAP is a proprietary language by SAP AG the comparison between ABAP and Java is legitimate and by no means advertising. Both languages play a major role in development of mid- to large-sized enterprise applications (with ABAP being the older language). SAP products have a large market share in the enterprise software field world-wide. Thus chances are high that as a developer you need to deal with them in one way or the other. Either because you need to deal with legacy R/3 applications or because you need to develop new software based on SAP technology. The comparison to Java is even more valid as the SAP community is slowly moving from old ABAP to newer J2EE (Java) based solutions. But because this is a slow process (very slow in deed) and because both languages are still being improved as a project manager or software developer you are often left alone with the decission to go with either one. As of today both methods are equaly valid for new SAP projects with no other language to choose from. Dennis Schulmeister (talk) 19:49, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Mainframe programming languages almost ignored[edit]

Why is it that almost every Wikipedia article on computing ignores the forst 50 years or so of programming? Where are full comparisons of traditional languages like IBM/360 Assembler/COBOL/PL/1/RPG?

Z/Architecture is the current version of the IBM/360 family with mostly full upward compatibility for 40 years Also PL/1 (where shown) is only as an imperative & Object-oriented paradigm, with no mention of procedural or structured) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.18.65 (talk) 08:39, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

DBMS is a programming language?[edit]

I think including applications and systems in this template is confusing and will lead to disorganization. I propose removing the "Database RDBMS" entry as off-topic. Jojalozzo 14:23, 10 September 2012 (UTC)