* I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages @ 2002-01-21 8:10 Yvan Radenac 2002-01-21 14:44 ` docdwarf ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Yvan Radenac @ 2002-01-21 8:10 UTC (permalink / raw) I am writing a small report about "Object oriented languages and their public implementations" for a course in Software Engineering. I am trying to classify and compare different oo languages. As i am not programmer, analyst or responsible of projects and the criterias are subjective, i am interesting in your experiences of object oriented language(s). I think that there's no universal language, so it's not to compare, in a global way, each language. The goal is to create some tables to find the best choice for a kind of software development. Thanks you to complete the 2 tables below for each language you use. Classification: -------------- Language|Paradigm(s)|Generality of use|Abstraction level|Area(s) of application --------|-----------|-----------------|-----------------|---------------------- | | | | Comparison: ---------- It's based on this scale table (to simplify): Very bad|bad|Correct|Good|Very good| --------|---|-------|----|---------| - - | - | O | + | + + | Language|Readibility|Writability|Reliability|Cost --------|-----------|-----------|-----------|---- | | | | Regards, Yvan P.S.: a resume of the criterias, based on a course of The University of Ottawa by Szpakowicz: Classification: -------------- Paradigms: imperative, logic-based, functionnal, object-oriented, ... Generality of use: general purpose, specialized like database language, ... Abstraction level: low-level (assemblers), high-level (a majority of languages), very high level (Prolog) Area of application: data processing (business applications), scientific computing, artificial intelligence, in-house computing applications (compiler construction, systems programming, ...) Comparison: ---------- Readability: - abstraction, support for generality: procedural abstraction, data absraction. - absence of ambiguity (and of too much choice). - Orthogonality: no restrictions on combinations of concepts. For example, can a procedure parametrer have ANY type? Can EVERYTHING be evaluated? - Expressivity of control and data structures. (Exemples of low expressive power: machine languages). - Appearance: style of comments, ... Writability: - Abstraction and simplicy like readibility. - Expressivity, like readibility. - Modularity and tools for modularization, support for integrated programmer's environments. Reliability: - Safety for the programmer (type checking, error and exception handling, unambiguous naming). Cost: - Development time (ease of programming, availability of code). - Efficiency of implementation: how easy it is to build a language processor. - Translation time and quality of object code. - Portability and standardization. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages 2002-01-21 8:10 I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages Yvan Radenac @ 2002-01-21 14:44 ` docdwarf 2002-01-21 20:11 ` Stephen J Spiro 2002-01-21 15:09 ` Ted Dennison 2002-01-22 2:24 ` James J. Gavan 2 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: docdwarf @ 2002-01-21 14:44 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <b9660815.0201210010.53b3266@posting.google.com>, Yvan Radenac <yvan.radenac@equant.com> wrote: >I am writing a small report about "Object oriented languages and their >public implementations" for a course in Software Engineering. Please do your own homework. DD ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages 2002-01-21 14:44 ` docdwarf @ 2002-01-21 20:11 ` Stephen J Spiro 2002-01-22 0:38 ` docdwarf 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Stephen J Spiro @ 2002-01-21 20:11 UTC (permalink / raw) docdwarf@panix.com wrote in message news:<a2h9h3$ggo$1@panix1.panix.com>... > In article <b9660815.0201210010.53b3266@posting.google.com>, > Yvan Radenac <yvan.radenac@equant.com> wrote: > >I am writing a small report about "Object oriented languages and their > >public implementations" for a course in Software Engineering. > > Please do your own homework. > > DD Not fair, Doc. He is doing generalized research on an extremely wide field, in which he cannot possibly have personal expertise. Given the topic, and in spite of the refernce provided by another post-er, it is sufficiently current and topical that there is probably very little in the literature which is relavant. "Field research", such as inquiring of experts, is completely appropriate in such a case. When I was in college, I had a "major paper" topic for which I could not find a resolution. I had done what I considered a very thorough analysis of the literature. Finally, I realized that one of the frequent contributors on the topic was on the faculty of my school. I looked him up, and aked him if there was (yet) a firm determination of the Genetic Cause of Audiogenic Seizure Susceptibility in Mice. Rather than tell me to do my own homework, he invited me to sit down, and told me what he knew. I think, given the topic, Mr Radenac is entitled to the same courtesy. {Just for the record, Doc, I usually back you up when you give that advice. For someone who just hasn't paid attention in class, or hasn't cracked the book, it's FINE advice. Mr Radenac's assignment, on the other hand, requires a legitimate search for expert opinion.} Stephen J Spiro ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages 2002-01-21 20:11 ` Stephen J Spiro @ 2002-01-22 0:38 ` docdwarf 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: docdwarf @ 2002-01-22 0:38 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <928495c6.0201211211.4192730d@posting.google.com>, Stephen J Spiro <stephenjspiro@mail.com> wrote: >docdwarf@panix.com wrote in message news:<a2h9h3$ggo$1@panix1.panix.com>... >> In article <b9660815.0201210010.53b3266@posting.google.com>, >> Yvan Radenac <yvan.radenac@equant.com> wrote: >> >I am writing a small report about "Object oriented languages and their >> >public implementations" for a course in Software Engineering. >> >> Please do your own homework. >> >> DD > > >Not fair, Doc. He is doing generalized research on an extremely wide >field, in which he cannot possibly have personal expertise. Given the >topic, and in spite of the refernce provided by another post-er, it is >sufficiently current and topical that there is probably very little in >the literature which is relavant. "Field research", such as inquiring >of experts, is completely appropriate in such a case. What is being done, it seems, is a scattershot approach of gathering data from sources which cannot be verified: 'Well, I asked the question on The Internet and a bunch of folks told me...' Is this how one 'create(s) some tables to find the best choice for a kind of software development'? It seems like GIGO to me. > >When I was in college, I had a "major paper" topic for which I could >not find a resolution. I had done what I considered a very thorough >analysis of the literature. Finally, I realized that one of the >frequent contributors on the topic was on the faculty of my school. I >looked him up, and aked him if there was (yet) a firm determination of >the Genetic Cause of Audiogenic Seizure Susceptibility in Mice. >Rather than tell me to do my own homework, he invited me to sit down, >and told me what he knew. You familiarised yourself sufficiently with the discipline to learn the name of a frequent contributor, you did nto wander about the school, pasting notes on bulletin-boards. > >I think, given the topic, Mr Radenac is entitled to the same courtesy. I think, given the quantity of learning and initiative Mr Radenac has shown, 'Please do your own homework' is *most* courteous. Were he given utterly spurious replies - 'Sure, the *best* way to deal with screen i-o is found in COBOL '68, honest!' - how would he know who is pulling the long bow... *unless* he does his own homework, first? > >{Just for the record, Doc, I usually back you up when you give that >advice. For someone who just hasn't paid attention in class, or >hasn't cracked the book, it's FINE advice. Mr Radenac's assignment, >on the other hand, requires a legitimate search for expert opinion.} Mr Radenac has not shown that he has paid any attention anywhere, except to the examples his textbook gave... or did you see something I didn't? DD ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages 2002-01-21 8:10 I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages Yvan Radenac 2002-01-21 14:44 ` docdwarf @ 2002-01-21 15:09 ` Ted Dennison 2002-01-22 7:54 ` Yvan Radenac 2002-01-22 2:24 ` James J. Gavan 2 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2002-01-21 15:09 UTC (permalink / raw) yvan.radenac@equant.com (Yvan Radenac) wrote in message news:<b9660815.0201210010.53b3266@posting.google.com>... > I am writing a small report about "Object oriented languages and their > public implementations" for a course in Software Engineering. > I am trying to classify and compare different oo languages. > As i am not programmer, analyst or responsible of projects and the > criterias are subjective, i am interesting in your experiences of > object oriented language(s). You should definitely look at "Guidelines for Choosing A Computer Language: Support For The Visionary Organization 2nd Edition" by Patricia K. Lawlis ( http://archive.adaic.com/docs/reports/lawlis/content.htm ) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages 2002-01-21 15:09 ` Ted Dennison @ 2002-01-22 7:54 ` Yvan Radenac 2002-01-22 8:51 ` Samir Sekkat 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Yvan Radenac @ 2002-01-22 7:54 UTC (permalink / raw) dennison@telepath.com (Ted Dennison) wrote in message news:<4519e058.0201210709.1ba1fbf2@posting.google.com>... > yvan.radenac@equant.com (Yvan Radenac) wrote in message news:<b9660815.0201210010.53b3266@posting.google.com>... > > I am writing a small report about "Object oriented languages and their > > public implementations" for a course in Software Engineering. > > I am trying to classify and compare different oo languages. > > As i am not programmer, analyst or responsible of projects and the > > criterias are subjective, i am interesting in your experiences of > > object oriented language(s). > > You should definitely look at "Guidelines for Choosing A Computer > Language: Support For The Visionary Organization 2nd Edition" by > Patricia K. Lawlis > ( http://archive.adaic.com/docs/reports/lawlis/content.htm ) Thank you very much for this link, it' exactly what i need. I post it to have the point of view of programmer, responsible of project, ... cause of their different experience(s). The real goal it's just to propose some tables to find the right language for a type of deveolpment. I think that each language have its own area of applications for a type of development: like Perl for rapidly create a test client for a smtp server developped in C ... I'm not interesting , YOU TOO a suppose, to find the badiest or the best language but just the most usefull language for a area of applications and a type of develpment (rapid, big project, ...). I tried to find the most general criterias which be applied on each language. I use this interview to obtain a real result by a average of all result. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages 2002-01-22 7:54 ` Yvan Radenac @ 2002-01-22 8:51 ` Samir Sekkat 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Samir Sekkat @ 2002-01-22 8:51 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <b9660815.0201212354.33abbf98@posting.google.com>, yvan.radenac@equant.com says... > I post it to have the point of view of programmer, responsible of > project, ... cause of their different experience(s). > The real goal it's just to propose some tables to find the right > language for a type of deveolpment. > I think that each language have its own area of applications for a > type of development: > like Perl for rapidly create a test client for a smtp server > developped in C ... > I'm not interesting , YOU TOO a suppose, to find the badiest or the > best language but just the most usefull language for a area of > applications and a type of develpment (rapid, big project, ...). > I tried to find the most general criterias which be applied on each > language. > I use this interview to obtain a real result by a average of all > result. > you might give a look to CL/CLOS Compared to Other Languages http://www.franz.com/resources/educational_resources/clos_versus_other/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages 2002-01-21 8:10 I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages Yvan Radenac 2002-01-21 14:44 ` docdwarf 2002-01-21 15:09 ` Ted Dennison @ 2002-01-22 2:24 ` James J. Gavan 2002-01-28 14:55 ` Yvan Radenac 2 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: James J. Gavan @ 2002-01-22 2:24 UTC (permalink / raw) Yvan Radenac wrote: > I am writing a small report about "Object oriented languages and their > public implementations" for a course in Software Engineering. > I am trying to classify and compare different oo languages. > As i am not programmer, analyst or responsible of projects and the > criterias are subjective, i am interesting in your experiences of > object oriented language(s). > > I think that there's no universal language, so it's not to compare, in > a global way, each language. > The goal is to create some tables to find the best choice for a kind > of software development. > Yvan, You've already been referred to one book. If your university has the following, then it is a good reference covering all OO languages with the EXCEPTION of COBOL, and of course, excluding any language du jour, which has popped up since the book was printed :- 'Object Oriented Program Languages" - Handbook of Programming Languages Volume I.- Peter H. Salus, Series Editor in Chief. (ISBN : 1-57870-009-4 ) - Macmillan Technical Publishing, 1998. To get a background on OO COBOL, (which has been around since '96), see the draft for the next standard due December 2002 :- http://www.incits.org/tc_home/j4.htm The draft (particularly Annex C) gives simple OO coding examples. Two things which I am currently using which as yet are not part of the above COBOL standard, (and are still waiting to be determined) :- - finalizing (destruction of objects - 'garbage' collection) - collections/dictionaries ( Those available from Micro Focus closely follow the structures in Smalltalk. If you are lucky, and your CS Department has a CD copy of Micro Focus Net Express, University Edition - then you could access the on-line help to see the structure of collections/dictionaries.) Both Fujitsu and Hitachi have collections - but I'm not aware of the details. At the current time there are four vendors with OO COBOL compilers - IBM, Fujitsu, Hitachi and Micro Focus, (the latter was temporarily under the name 'Merant'). IBM is a very 'cut-down' version as they are having a re-think. No information is available from Hitachi as it is only marketed in Japan. You can access the Fujitsu and Micro Focus sites for further information. (Fujitsu is currently enhanced to work with Microsoft .Net). > Thanks you to complete the 2 tables below for each language you use. > Sorry that's a very subjective thing. I'd probably give COBOL high marks which other language users might dispute <G>. (Although I have access to COBOL-designed Java classes - currently I work TOTALLY in COBOL including classes for generating GUIs). Jimmy, Calgary AB > > Classification: > -------------- > Language|Paradigm(s)|Generality of use|Abstraction level|Area(s) of > application > --------|-----------|-----------------|-----------------|---------------------- > | | | | > > Comparison: > ---------- > It's based on this scale table (to simplify): > Very bad|bad|Correct|Good|Very good| > --------|---|-------|----|---------| > - - | - | O | + | + + | > > Language|Readibility|Writability|Reliability|Cost > --------|-----------|-----------|-----------|---- > | | | | > > Regards, > Yvan > > P.S.: a resume of the criterias, based on a course of The University > of Ottawa by Szpakowicz: > > Classification: > -------------- > Paradigms: imperative, logic-based, functionnal, object-oriented, ... > Generality of use: general purpose, specialized like database > language, ... > Abstraction level: low-level (assemblers), high-level (a majority of > languages), very high level (Prolog) > Area of application: data processing (business applications), > scientific computing, artificial intelligence, in-house computing > applications (compiler construction, systems programming, ...) > > Comparison: > ---------- > Readability: > - abstraction, support for generality: procedural abstraction, data > absraction. > - absence of ambiguity (and of too much choice). > - Orthogonality: no restrictions on combinations of concepts. For > example, can a procedure parametrer have ANY type? Can EVERYTHING be > evaluated? > - Expressivity of control and data structures. (Exemples of low > expressive power: machine languages). > - Appearance: style of comments, ... > Writability: > - Abstraction and simplicy like readibility. > - Expressivity, like readibility. > - Modularity and tools for modularization, support for integrated > programmer's environments. > Reliability: > - Safety for the programmer (type checking, error and exception > handling, unambiguous naming). > Cost: > - Development time (ease of programming, availability of code). > - Efficiency of implementation: how easy it is to build a language > processor. > - Translation time and quality of object code. > - Portability and standardization. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages 2002-01-22 2:24 ` James J. Gavan @ 2002-01-28 14:55 ` Yvan Radenac 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Yvan Radenac @ 2002-01-28 14:55 UTC (permalink / raw) Thank you for your posts, it's the first time i use the news and my english is far from perfect. Thank you for all url you gave me. It's a good beginning for my report. I'm interresting in your experience as programmer, responsible of projects, .... As i will make a average of all results to obtain something the most objective i can. I found some old documents and comparisons (they are written between 1992 and 1997) or very subjective (like Java versus others by Sun, ...). It seems that the languages the most used will be: Ada (95), Beta, OCaml, CLOS, C++, Objective-C, Eiffel, Java, Modula-3, O Oberon, Object Pascal (like Turbo-Pascal, Delphi, ...), Perl, Python, Ruby, Sather?, Simula, Smalltalk. I don't add to this list all the languages that have only a commercial implementation, like VBA, ... as i write a report about "oo languages and their public implementation". If you think i forget one or more oo common languages, let me know. The result will be posted under the Free Documentation Licence from GNU. Of course, if you want to answer this table, thank you. Regards Yvan Comparison: ---------- It's based on this scale table (to simplify): Very bad|bad|Correct|Good|Very good| --------|---|-------|----|---------| - - | - | O | + | + + | Language|Readibility|Writability|Reliability|Cost --------|-----------|-----------|-----------|---- | | | | P.S.: a resume of the criterias, based on a course of The University of Ottawa by Szpakowicz: Comparison: ---------- Readability: - abstraction, support for generality: procedural abstraction, data absraction. - absence of ambiguity (and of too much choice). - Orthogonality: no restrictions on combinations of concepts. For example, can a procedure parametrer have ANY type? Can EVERYTHING be evaluated? - Expressivity of control and data structures. (Exemples of low expressive power: machine languages). - Appearance: style of comments, ... Writability: - Abstraction and simplicy like readibility. - Expressivity, like readibility. - Modularity and tools for modularization, support for integrated programmer's environments. Reliability: - Safety for the programmer (type checking, error and exception handling, unambiguous naming). Cost: - Development time (ease of programming, availability of code). - Efficiency of implementation: how easy it is to build a language processor. - Translation time and quality of object code. - Portability and standardization. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-01-28 14:55 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2002-01-21 8:10 I need your experience - classification and comparison of languages Yvan Radenac 2002-01-21 14:44 ` docdwarf 2002-01-21 20:11 ` Stephen J Spiro 2002-01-22 0:38 ` docdwarf 2002-01-21 15:09 ` Ted Dennison 2002-01-22 7:54 ` Yvan Radenac 2002-01-22 8:51 ` Samir Sekkat 2002-01-22 2:24 ` James J. Gavan 2002-01-28 14:55 ` Yvan Radenac
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox