Building a periodic table of programming languages; suggestions/feedback?

#1

Post by benshyong » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 8:25 PM UTC

Hello everybody, I want to learn some front-end development/design (Angular.js, D3.js), so I am resurrecting an old project that I did to learn Rails almost three years ago.

Anything that you would want to see besides the list of all the languages (currently colored by type of language: OO, procedural, functional, etc.)? I want to plan this out a little bit before I start building, so I wanted to reach out and see anybody has suggestions on how to make this project more useful/informative as a showcase of the diversity of languages out there! Suggestions so far: Link to wikipedia pages for languages, code samples.

Here is the project as it stands so far: http://codingtable.heroku.com

Thanks, can't wait to see how this turns out!

Re: Building a periodic table of programming languages; suggestions/feedback?

#2

Post by angersock » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 8:35 PM UTC

Your reset button doesn't bring back the stuff I clicked on. :(

The real Periodic Chart has some rough guidelines for why elements end up where they do--weight, and so on, and things in the same columns have similar behavior in some ways (charge generally, as I recall). You might want to consider doing something similar for this--have all the prototype languages next each other, the lispy ones next to each other, etc.

Cool project though!

Re: Building a periodic table of programming languages; suggestions/feedback?

#3

Post by informatimago » Thu, Jul 18, 2013, 8:49 PM UTC

the perfect gaz column is filled with Lambda calculus, LISP, LeLisp, MacLisp, ZetaLisp, Scheme (with all its isotopes from rs, to r7rs) and of course the most stable of them: Common Lisp.

Re: Building a periodic table of programming languages; suggestions/feedback?

#4

Post by quietthrow » Fri, Jul 19, 2013, 3:50 PM UTC

My two cents. The idea is good but I am not sure if you are presenting it in the most user friendly way. When one selects a category or year its hard to easily get a clear picture of whats 'on' or falls in the selection selection and whats 'off' (whats not part of the selection criteria).