Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.fsmpi.rwth-aachen.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Joshua_Cranmer_=f0=9f=90=a7?= Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Return of the Applets? Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 21:36:27 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 32 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 02:35:33 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="8cedddb29338592f734c41b16a68fadc"; logging-data="12772"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/hjiI7VHRx4rpbIO4XiDY2oeluW8BfVj0=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.0 in-reply-to: Cancel-Lock: sha1:YuIk8rWbFg8bwa1L+A7LN0WhCfw= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:31514 On 4/6/2015 7:03 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > What you don't understand it - while every languages has advantages in > some areas, every language also has disadvantages in some areas. The > two have a tendency to average out over the course of a large number of > programs. If you were to claim that the plurality of existing software were coded in COBOL by some reasonable metric (including LOC), I would be skeptical of that claim without references, but I would not find it unbelievable (I personally think that threshold was crossed by Java, C#, C, or C++ sometime in the last in 15 years, but I have no evidence to back it up). Certainly, I won't dispute that a large body of extant COBOL code exists. The claim I've objected to is not that COBOL is present in extant code, but rather that COBOL is the most-used language in terms of new code being added each year. I don't have any hard evidence of that, but there is circumstantial evidence to support it: other languages being more prevalent in academic curricula, more job advertisements, more resources being available, the fact that even major COBOL-users mostly limit their use of COBOL to maintenance of existing applications and use newer languages for new middleware/backend applications, etc. > Which still does not say that spreadsheets are programming languages. > And it's impossible to provide references to something which is not true. It refers specifically to "The number of end-users who write spreadsheet programs"--if spreadsheets are programs, then what are the formulas in them if not code written in a spreadsheet programming language? -- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth