Most popular programming languages

Drifter said:
You joke, there are some companies still running RPG. Well mostly RPG II/III.
Click to expand...

Actually no joke! You should look into RPG free form(the latest version). It has been modernized nicely.
Anyone that can code in C# or Java could pick up RPG quickly these days.

The days of column coding is long gone....
 
Totally agree.

The RPG we use runs circles around java with regards to performance.
 
People also see green screen when they hear RPG coding.
These days you code in a modified version of the Eclipse IDE called RDI(Relational developer for i) which works pretty well.
 
@Hamster, cguy
It is nice to hear opinion from people who actually do programming in Python.
I agree about separation of blocks of code problem. It can be confusing when syntax checker do not bring the same interpretation as the programmer intended to do. And other comments are valuable too.
However I completely disagree that programming language has to be fast to be considered all-purpose. Fast-slow is relative. If we take speed as a criterium, then C is not all-purpose too. Most of my projects were written 90% in C and 10% in assembler. So mixing laguages is a common practice, isn't?
 
sajunky said:
@Hamster, cguy
It is nice to hear opinion from people who actually do programming in Python.
I agree about separation of blocks of code problem. It can be confusing when syntax checker do not bring the same interpretation as the programmer intended to do. And other comments are valuable too.
However I completely disagree that programming language has to be fast to be considered all-purpose. Fast-slow is relative. If we take speed as a criterium, then C is not all-purpose too. Most of my projects were written 90% in C and 10% in assembler. So mixing laguages is a common practice, isn't?
Click to expand...

Well, I didn't say that C was an all purpose language, which is of course why I use Python too. A truly all-purpose language doesn't exist.

I think that what Hamster was getting at, was that everything you can do in Python, you can do in another language, although for some things, it won't be as easy (which is what Python generally brings to the table). The reverse isn't generally true (e.g., when near-optimal performance is required).

Also, why did you have to write 10% of your projects in assembler? That seems like an aweful lot. With intrinsics, it is usually possible to get the compiler to do almost exactly what you want (so I generally read assembler, to see if I need to massage the code, but very seldom have to write it - unless of course, I don't have a compiler, which has happened a few times).
 
Last edited:
sajunky said:
@Hamster, cguy
It is nice to hear opinion from people who actually do programming in Python.
I agree about separation of blocks of code problem. It can be confusing when syntax checker do not bring the same interpretation as the programmer intended to do. And other comments are valuable too.
However I completely disagree that programming language has to be fast to be considered all-purpose. Fast-slow is relative. If we take speed as a criterium, then C is not all-purpose too. Most of my projects were written 90% in C and 10% in assembler. So mixing laguages is a common practice, isn't?
Click to expand...
What cguy said I said is what I tried to say: there is nothing Python gives me that is so good that I can't find it somewhere else. There is no one language that fits all the criteria but there are languages that can do 90% of the work though.

Most of my career has been on projects where performance is factor so it is something to always consider.

Other things I look for is ease of use and deployment. If a language and its IDEs takes half a day to configure and you need GBs of space for it (or the language comes bundled with Ask Toolbar :wtf: ) then I start losing interest. I like things simple.

Same goes for deployments. I much prefer being able to compile the same code for Linux, Mac and Windows on my laptop into one binary and then copying that one file onto the target machine with the only prerequisite being free disk space as opposed to installing and maintaining frameworks and copying 100s of files.

But that's just me.
 
cguy said:
Also, why did you have to write 10% of your projects in assembler? That seems like an aweful lot. With intrinsics, it is usually possible to get the compiler to do almost exactly what you want (so I generally read assembler, to see if I need to massage the code, but very seldom have to write it - unless of course, I don't have a compiler, which has happened a few times).
Click to expand...
I had an intrinsic option, it was used when appropriate. Speed was not the only reason, I have to admit. Many other factors did. Read my first post, I didn't do application level programming.

Coming back to Python. It has everything it is needed except speed, which is not a problem with careful design. Popularity is steadily increasing and I think it will continue to do so.
 
sajunky said:
I had an intrinsic option, it was used when appropriate. Speed was not the only reason, I have to admit. Many other factors did. Read my first post, I didn't do application level programming.

Coming back to Python. It has everything it is needed except speed, which is not a problem with careful design. Popularity is steadily increasing and I think it will continue to do so.
Click to expand...

How is careful design going to help you with: HPC codes, drivers, operating systems, JIT compilers, compilers, trading systems, ray-tracers, network processor programming? (Off the top of my head)
 
Last edited:
sajunky said:
I had an intrinsic option, it was used when appropriate. Speed was not the only reason, I have to admit. Many other factors did. Read my first post, I didn't do application level programming.

Coming back to Python. It has everything it is needed except speed, which is not a problem with careful design. Popularity is steadily increasing and I think it will continue to do so.
Click to expand...

Careful programming design will only give you that much.

Regarding the popularity, well, ask the site that will give you the answer you most want. But here:

python.png

Python is 25 years old and its design philosophy has always been to be a pretty/easy language, hence the popularity especially for educational purposes.

I'm pretty sure it will lose significant ground over the next decade with the advent of the newer and more modern languages.
 
Hamster said:
Regarding the popularity, well, ask the site that will give you the answer you most want. But here:

View attachment 317161
Click to expand...
It was a painful transition from Python v2 to v3 (as showing on the graph), but it is back on the growing path. More details would reveal when splitting graph to show v2/v3 separately. I don't talk about 25 years old language.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X