=Why?= Why is this called "Solutions by Programming Language" when there's a list of programming paradigms but not a single listed language? Shouldn't this be "Solutions by Programming Paradigm" instead? :It's not just paradigms here. There are all kinds of language features. It's solutions by language because the languages are divided by those features. Maybe it should be solutions by language feature or something. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 02:20, 16 June 2010 (UTC) :: Except that it's sorting ''languages'' by language feature, rather than solutions. A "Solutions by language feature" would require marking features-used on a per-example basis. That'd be an awesome piece of data to have available for category, search and comparison, but not particularly likely to be well-maintained. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 12:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC) : It's the way it is because that was the original category name for browsing by language, the category grew too large, and then organization was applied (first with some hand organization, then automated by language features, which we'd just started cataloging). Since it's still the original category name, the URL is over three years old; there are a lot of links to the page. Take a look at [[:Category:Programming Languages]] to see what happens when no organization is applied to it. All that said, the category page body could use a ''lot'' of cleaning up. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 12:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

=CPP=

CPP is the C preprocessor, which is also the C++ preprocessor, which processes the macros for both languages. Why not treat it as a language in itself? It is possible to run the preprocessor as a standalone language processor. Examples with macros in C++ and examples with macros in C (e.g., [[99 Bottles of Beer]]) seem to be either duplicates or very similar.

:If CPP is added as separate language, I think it would be better to call it "C preprocessor". Those acronyms tend to be obscure. --[[User:PauliKL|PauliKL]] 13:47, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

=Language vs Dialect=

I think this collection is getting just a little out of hand - should this be sub-categorized somehow? Do we really need Visual Basic and Visual Basic .Net and VB.net (is that just redundant)? In addition to BASIC and FreeBASIC? Does it make sense to have MySQL and PostgreSQL entries? I would bet that MIRC is the same as MIRC scripting language. This whole listing here just looks kinda helter-skelter. [[User:Sgeier|Sgeier]] 18:44, 1 February 2007 (EST) :Addendum: I also notice LISP vs Common Lisp vs Scheme.[[User:Sgeier|Sgeier]] 18:49, 1 February 2007 (EST) ::[[Common Lisp]] and [[Scheme]] are certainly different. Maybe [[LISP]] is for solutions common to either? or for the ancient Lisp dialects? Good question. --[[User:IanOsgood|IanOsgood]] 17:43, 16 November 2007 (MST) [[wp:Comparison_of_programming_languages#General_comparison|Ideas on Categorization]] ==add SDL==

Since this language aready has tasks solved it should be added to the Solutions by Programming Language section!

:[[SDL]] isn't a programming language, it's a library which makes tasks like GUI development easier. --[[User:Short Circuit|Short Circuit]] 23:28, 9 February 2007 (EST)

:: I've discovered today that SDL is even a language (Simple Declarative Language); unlucky clashing. I suppose that if someone one day will add code for SDL (language), we should rename SDL (the library) to something like libSDL ... --[[User:ShinTakezou|ShinTakezou]] 10:06, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

== C plus plus ==

There's still two different entries here - One for "C plus plus" and one for "C++". [[User:Sgeier|Sgeier]] 00:48, 20 February 2007 (EST) :Finally fixed.

== Bash vs. Shell vs. Unix Shell ==

Is this list an index or a proscriptive sort of list? Because I just wandered in looking for a reminder how to do some task X in BASH and couldn't find it. Went elsewhere, solved my needed task, then came back to figure out WTF. Searching on 'bash', I found plenty of references to BASH, and via them the 'Unix Shell' element on 'Solutions by Programming Language'.

So... if this is a user-friendly index, some entries like 'Bash' and/or a 'Shell' entry that then disambiguates to all the shell scripting languages might be helpful. Heck, just adding plain text under 'B' that said: BASH (see Unix Shell) would have been sensible.

:[[Bash]] now redirects to [[Bourne Again SHell]]. --[[User:IanOsgood|IanOsgood]] 17:39, 16 November 2007 (MST)

== Organization ==

So we have over 200 languages on the site, meaning that not all the pages fit in a single category listing. A few small changes to [[Template:Language]], [[Template:Feature]] and [[Template:np_language]] resulted in a much nicer-looking and better-organized category page, There's still [[:Category:Programming Languages]] for the complete listing (and any bots and such should already have been drawing from that category). Thoughts? Observations? Small edits to those three templates might reflect the largest visible change to site organization since RC's creation. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 05:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)