What Languages Fix

[Image [Image [Image [Image 4: What Languages gif) Kevin Kelleher suggested an interesting way to compare programming languages: to describe each in terms of the problem it fixes. The surprising thing is how many, and how well, languages can be described this way. **Algol:** Assembly language is too low-level. **Pascal:** Algol doesn't have enough data types. **Modula:** Pascal is too wimpy for systems programming. **Simula:** Algol isn't good enough at simulations. **Smalltalk:** Not everything in Simula is an object. **Fortran:** Assembly language is too low-level. **Cobol:** Fortran is scary. **PL/1:** Fortran doesn't have enough data types.

**Ada:** Every existing language is missing something. **Basic:** Fortran is scary. **APL:** Fortran isn't good enough at manipulating arrays. **J:** APL requires its own character set. **C:** Assembly language is too low-level. **C++:** C is too low-level. **Java:** C++ is a kludge. And Microsoft is going to crush us. **C#:** Java is controlled by Sun. **Lisp:** Turing Machines are an awkward way to describe computation. **Scheme:** MacLisp is a kludge. **T:** Scheme has no libraries. **Common Lisp:** There are too many dialects of Lisp. **Dylan:** Scheme has no libraries, and Lisp syntax is scary. **Perl:** Shell scripts/awk/sed are not enough like programming languages.

**Python:** Perl is a kludge. **Ruby:** Perl is a kludge, and Lisp syntax is scary. **Prolog:** Programming is not enough like [Image [Image [Image gif)Japanese [Image [Image [Image [Image gif)French [Image [Image [Image [Image [Image gif)Portuguese [Image [Image gif) * * *