6 ms·

I'm an ignorant pleb, is this the Q you're thinking of? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_(programming_language_from_Kx_Systems) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_

I'm an ignorant pleb, is this the Q you're thinking of? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_(programming_language_from_Kx_Systems) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_(programming_language_from_K... If so, honestly seems kind of esoteric and I'm not really offended by Microsoft using that letter.

smitherfield 9y ago
>seems kind of esoteric Which is a bit unfortunate, because (APL-like) array languages, of which Q appears to be one of the more approachable/popular, have a lot of very interesting ideas that I think mainstream languages could benefit from. Their unpopularity is self-inflicted due to the wacky syntax, of course.
- dualogy 9y ago
  Any good infos/articles/series compelling the mainstream-language practitioners of such interesting-ideas while ideally hiding away their wacky-syntax as much as possible?
geocar 9y ago
> honestly seems kind of esoteric Q# is more esoteric than Q is. Has far fewer users, and in every way less of a claim to the name. ... just like "curl". > I'm not really offended by Microsoft using that letter Okay, but I am. Now what?
- jetti 9y ago
  Sincere question: Does C# offend you?
  - Y_Y 9y ago
    Not GP, but I initially though Q# was some sort of CLI (another great name there) version of Q, in the same sense that C# (like C++) signifies some sort of augmented version of C.
  - geocar 9y ago
    > Sincere question: Does C# offend you? No. C# has some relationship with C and C++ and it's clear that Microsoft wants us to think about the C-ness of C# when we see the "C" in C#; C's implied trademark is being respected here. Now my turn for a sincere question: If someone gets the name "curl" and everyone in a market understands that name means something, and someone comes around and uses the name for something else[1], why do you think that's okay? [1]: http://web.archive.org/web/20160819042745/https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell/pull/1901 http://web.archive.org/web/20160819042745/https://github.com... (archive.org link since github is taking a long time to load)
    - jetti 9y ago
      >If someone gets the name "curl" and everyone in a market understands that name means something, and someone comes around and uses the name for something else[1], why do you think that's okay? I never said it was ok. I actually didn't know about this until this thread and didn't know the details until I read the link you posted. I think that is shady and wrong. On top of that, curl is so popular that it is hard to believe those who implemented that command in Powershell did not know about that already. That said, when it comes to a language it is entirely possible for people to not know that a language Q already exists. Also, it is going to be hard to confuse the two languages when searching for resources, since majority of people looking for Q# resources are going to actually be typing in "Q#" and not "Q". On top of that, Q being the first letter in quantum and it being a language designed for quantum computing makes sense. Plus they add their signature # at the end which they seem to like to do for new languages (J#, C#, F#). Unlike curl, I see very little malice in the naming of the Q# language EDIT: I have another sincere question for you: What are your thoughts on the J[0] and J#[1] programming language names? Microsoft created J# as a bridge between Java and Visual J++ to transition to .NET. This was in 2002, 12 years after the J programming language first appeared. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_(programming_language) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_(programming_language) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_Sharp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_Sharp
      - geocar 9y ago
        > when it comes to a language it is entirely possible for people to not know that a language Q already exists. I don't buy it. https://www.bing.com/search?q=q+programming+language https://www.bing.com/search?q=q+programming+language > it is going to be hard to confuse the two languages when searching for resources, since majority of people looking for Q# resources are going to actually be typing in "Q#" and not "Q". Again, I don't buy it. https://www.bing.com/search?q=q%23+programming+language https://www.bing.com/search?q=q%23+programming+language Try harder. > they add their signature # at the end which they seem to like to do for new languages (J#, C#, F#). which follow Java, C, and System F.
- doktrin 9y ago
  > Q# is more esoteric than Q is. That in no way negates my point. It's not a question of which is more obscure, but that the 'original' item is obscure in the first place. One unknown language reusing part of another's name means that nobody's gonna be legitimately confused or misled here. Moreover, they derive practically no benefit whatsoever by piggybacking on the (limited) fame of the 'original'. Curl is a different story altogether.
  - geocar 9y ago
    > That in no way negates my point. I thought you were genuinely confused as to why I was offended and was responding as such. I had no idea that you believed your lack of opinion and offence somehow invalidated mine. > One unknown language reusing part of another's name means that nobody's gonna be legitimately confused or misled here I'm not going to agree that q is generally "unknown" just because you don't know what it is.
    - doktrin 9y ago
      > I had no idea that you believed your lack of opinion and offence somehow invalidated mine. Not at all. Your opinion is hilarious, but everyone's entitled to an opinion.

smitherfield 9y ago

>seems kind of esoteric Which is a bit unfortunate, because (APL-like) array languages, of which Q appears to be one of the more approachable/popular, have a lot of very interesting ideas that I think mainstream languages could benefit from. Their unpopularity is self-inflicted due to the wacky syntax, of course.

dualogy 9y ago
Any good infos/articles/series compelling the mainstream-language practitioners of such interesting-ideas while ideally hiding away their wacky-syntax as much as possible?

geocar 9y ago

> honestly seems kind of esoteric Q# is more esoteric than Q is. Has far fewer users, and in every way less of a claim to the name. ... just like "curl". > I'm not really offended by Microsoft using that letter Okay, but I am. Now what?

jetti 9y ago
Sincere question: Does C# offend you?
- Y_Y 9y ago
  Not GP, but I initially though Q# was some sort of CLI (another great name there) version of Q, in the same sense that C# (like C++) signifies some sort of augmented version of C.
- geocar 9y ago
  > Sincere question: Does C# offend you? No. C# has some relationship with C and C++ and it's clear that Microsoft wants us to think about the C-ness of C# when we see the "C" in C#; C's implied trademark is being respected here. Now my turn for a sincere question: If someone gets the name "curl" and everyone in a market understands that name means something, and someone comes around and uses the name for something else[1], why do you think that's okay? [1]: http://web.archive.org/web/20160819042745/https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell/pull/1901 http://web.archive.org/web/20160819042745/https://github.com... (archive.org link since github is taking a long time to load)
  - jetti 9y ago
    >If someone gets the name "curl" and everyone in a market understands that name means something, and someone comes around and uses the name for something else[1], why do you think that's okay? I never said it was ok. I actually didn't know about this until this thread and didn't know the details until I read the link you posted. I think that is shady and wrong. On top of that, curl is so popular that it is hard to believe those who implemented that command in Powershell did not know about that already. That said, when it comes to a language it is entirely possible for people to not know that a language Q already exists. Also, it is going to be hard to confuse the two languages when searching for resources, since majority of people looking for Q# resources are going to actually be typing in "Q#" and not "Q". On top of that, Q being the first letter in quantum and it being a language designed for quantum computing makes sense. Plus they add their signature # at the end which they seem to like to do for new languages (J#, C#, F#). Unlike curl, I see very little malice in the naming of the Q# language EDIT: I have another sincere question for you: What are your thoughts on the J[0] and J#[1] programming language names? Microsoft created J# as a bridge between Java and Visual J++ to transition to .NET. This was in 2002, 12 years after the J programming language first appeared. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_(programming_language) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_(programming_language) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_Sharp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_Sharp
    - geocar 9y ago
      > when it comes to a language it is entirely possible for people to not know that a language Q already exists. I don't buy it. https://www.bing.com/search?q=q+programming+language https://www.bing.com/search?q=q+programming+language > it is going to be hard to confuse the two languages when searching for resources, since majority of people looking for Q# resources are going to actually be typing in "Q#" and not "Q". Again, I don't buy it. https://www.bing.com/search?q=q%23+programming+language https://www.bing.com/search?q=q%23+programming+language Try harder. > they add their signature # at the end which they seem to like to do for new languages (J#, C#, F#). which follow Java, C, and System F.
doktrin 9y ago
> Q# is more esoteric than Q is. That in no way negates my point. It's not a question of which is more obscure, but that the 'original' item is obscure in the first place. One unknown language reusing part of another's name means that nobody's gonna be legitimately confused or misled here. Moreover, they derive practically no benefit whatsoever by piggybacking on the (limited) fame of the 'original'. Curl is a different story altogether.
- geocar 9y ago
  > That in no way negates my point. I thought you were genuinely confused as to why I was offended and was responding as such. I had no idea that you believed your lack of opinion and offence somehow invalidated mine. > One unknown language reusing part of another's name means that nobody's gonna be legitimately confused or misled here I'm not going to agree that q is generally "unknown" just because you don't know what it is.
  - doktrin 9y ago
    > I had no idea that you believed your lack of opinion and offence somehow invalidated mine. Not at all. Your opinion is hilarious, but everyone's entitled to an opinion.