The L Programming Language

jtemplestein wrote: post #3

Dear Language authors, please stop using single-letter names or generic terms for programming languages. It messes with the Google.

Duckduckgo seems to offer reasonable results: http://duckduckgo.com/?q=L. While it doesn't solve this problem entirely, it's a good starting point.

Re: The L Programming Language

#5

Post by JulianMorrison » Mon, May 16, 2011, 9:23 AM UTC

jtemplestein wrote: post #3

Dear Language authors, please stop using single-letter names or generic terms for programming languages. It messes with the Google.

J has an excuse. They only use identifiers longer than 1 letter because ASCII lacks for APL symbols.

Re: The L Programming Language

#6

Post by bhickey » Mon, May 16, 2011, 11:03 AM UTC

jtemplestein wrote: post #3

Dear Language authors, please stop using single-letter names or generic terms for programming languages. It messes with the Google.

This name collision is even worse than you suggest. Lindenmayer systems (L-systems) were invented back in the 60s and have been called L-systems for years.

Re: The L Programming Language

#7

Post by cschmidt » Mon, May 16, 2011, 2:15 PM UTC

jtemplestein wrote: post #3

Dear Language authors, please stop using single-letter names or generic terms for programming languages. It messes with the Google.

Indeed, that's what I thought of. The problem for R is so bad, people have created special purpose search engines like www.rseek.org .

Re: The L Programming Language

#8

Post by fexl » Mon, May 16, 2011, 6:42 PM UTC

Looks a bit like my Fexl (http://fexl.com/code), though Fexl has a much smaller grammar and footprint. I'm not sure I have all the "capability" and "distributed" stuff though, and I definitely don't have threads, much preferring "fork" (i.e., O.S. level blocking system calls with timeouts are my friends).

(Incidentally, GA Tech is my alma mater.)

Re: The L Programming Language

#9

Post by joshuafcole » Tue, May 17, 2011, 10:28 AM UTC

bhickey wrote: post #6

jtemplestein wrote: post #3

Dear Language authors, please stop using single-letter names or generic terms for programming languages. It messes with the Google.

This name collision is even worse than you suggest. Lindenmayer systems (L-systems) were invented back in the 60s and have been called L-systems for years.

Actually, I followed the link because I thought this was referring to a programming language derived from them.