Re: 4th generation languages

["Jon A. Lambert" <jlsysinc@ix.netcom.com>]

Aron Felix Gurski <agurski@sn.no> wrote in article <32668924.175A@sn.no>...
> Roger Martinez wrote:
> > 
> > I am taking a computer class and my instructor asked me to write a
paper
> > on "4th generation languages". Is this a common term to refer to a
group
> > of currently used languages? I am looking for opinions that will help
me
> > define what this term means. What languages make up the other
> > generations?
> > 
> > Replies via email would be greatly appreciated.
> > 
> > TIA,
> > Roger
> 
> 1. Is this a common term to refer to a group of currently used
> languages?
> 	Yes, but less and less frequently. Still most definitely in use in the 
> 	mainframe world.
> 
> 2. What languages make up the other generations?
> 	1st generation: machine language (we actually programmed in decimal or 
> 	                octal machine code)
> 
> 	2nd generation: assembler (you have no idea of what an improvement 
> 	                *this* was from the 1st generation!)
> 
> 	3rd generation: the langauges that include FORTRAN, Algol, COBOL, LISP, 
>                         as well as newer procedural langauges (e.g.
> Pascal,
> 	                Modula-2, Modula-3, C(++), Ada 95, Eiffel)
> 
> 	4th generation: usually proprietary languages that include FOCUS, the 
> 	                language used by SAS Institute's products, etc. and 
> 	                more recent languages like xBase (I'd classify APL as
> 	                4th generation -- these languages tended to have 
> 	                reserved words that performed *huge* operations, like
> 	                statistical analyses, in one statement)
> 
> Good luck with the paper!
> 
> 						-- Aron
This reply concurs with my understanding of the definition of these
terms.  At least with the definitions of the 1st through 3rd generation.  

4th generational languages are those which are non-procedural.
SQL certainly falls within this category, for it is purely non-procedural.
It is also not a very robust language.  

I have also heard C referred to as a 2 1/2 generation language.  This
is probably because of its abililty to access a level of hardware control
that assembler languages have.  

Vendors frequently refer to their new languages as 4GLs.
Particularly those that involve GUI.

You'll find its become a buzzword that really doesn't have
have the meaning that the original authors intended.