3 ms·
well, certainly not every programming language. i.e.: i'm one of the most senior ACT3 programmers worldwide. (well, there were only about a dozen or so people)
by franze 15y ago
well, certainly not every programming language.
i.e.: i'm one of the most senior ACT3 programmers worldwide. (well, there were only about a dozen or so people) it was a programming language used extensively at the national austria press agency. it was - at it's time (around 2001) - for more advanced as PHP 4. the hello world would have looked something like this
<!--%'hello world'-->
(the <!-- --> was a relict from ACT2 ...)
yes it was an abomination, but it worked, and it was fast.
ok, anyway, ARC is missing, too. I think the claim "every programming language" is a) wrong and b) not really feasible.
- bmelton 15y agoIt's a work in progress, with the goal of getting every programming language in there. Submit a pull request for ACT3 and you'll have one less language's absence to notice.
- franze 15y agowill do. still "every programming language" - it's not really feasible. does anyone know how many company/cooperation internal programming language are supposed to exist? is there even a way to estimate it?
- albertzeyer 15y ago"every programming language" is an infinite set. Every programming language where an interpreter/compiler was implemented once is maybe better. But, when you consider that most programmers have at one point invented their own language, or languages (I cannot really count how much toy languages I have created at some point), it is still way too much and impossible to get them all. Maybe more restrictive would be to take languages which at least 2 people have used at one point. But even then... The point I'm trying to make is: "Every programming language" will always be wrong.