Wikidata:Property proposal/programming paradigm
programming paradigm edit
| Description | the programming paradigm in which a programming language is classified |
|---|---|
| Represents | programming paradigm (Q188267) |
| Data type | Item |
| Template parameter | "paradigm" in en:Template:Infobox programming language |
| Domain | programming language (Q9143) |
| Example |
|
- Motivation
This property is important for the classification of programming languages and to be compatible with the mentioned infobox. The Wikipedia article en:Programming paradigm has a box with a list of items that can be used within this property. It could be simplified to "paradigm" if the property could be useful in other areas. Luk3 (talk) 02:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
- Discussion
Support. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:13, 21 November 2016 (UTC)- Support --Tohaomg (talk) 20:03, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
- Support. Looks like this will allow us to describe aspects of these languages we can't currently represent. YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 18:38, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
WikiProject Informatics has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead. Does this seem right? ChristianKl (talk) 21:03, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Oppose This is a classification property, I prefer a classification using classes per Help:Classification. What would be more interesting would be properties to describe the types of programming languages (something to describe that functional programming fundamental obects/bases are function. author TomT0m / talk page 11:32, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- As a second thought, I think we should get before taking such a decision be straight on what a paradigm is : for enwiki : Programming paradigms are a way to classify programming languages and for frwiki : Un paradigme de programmation est un style fondamental de programmation informatique qui traite de la manière dont les solutions aux problèmes doivent être formulées dans un langage de programmation (A programming paradigm is a fundamental style of computer programming who deals with the way the solutions of the problems must be expressed in a programming language.) But the frwiki article is noted as needing sources. This way of saying things implies that this is not a direct classification of programming languages, and that we could define the "multi paradigm programming language" class as something like "there is several values of allowed paradigms for this language".
- In the first, clearly this is a way of classifying programming languages, and in the second, it is not directly (this reflects the ArthurPSmith Search and my interrogation about this property).
- A quicly made bibliography about an ontology of programming languages : http://www.scienpress.com/Upload/JCM/Vol%202_4_4.pdf ; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242381616_Towards_a_Programming_Language_Ontology (a language theorist perspective) , another page on classification of programming languages : https://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~pvr/paradigms.html and they indeed use the definition of the frwiki article : A programming paradigm is a style of programming a computer that is defined by a specific set of programming concepts and techniques, as embodied by its kernel language author TomT0m / talk page 12:21, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- Just a quick line about classification of languages in the "low/high" level scale : http://er.yuvayana.org/definition-classification-of-computer-programming-languages/ (a sample, there is many of such pages in google results)
- A highly narrower perspective : classification of massively parallel languages : http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.39.2856&rep=rep1&type=pdf author TomT0m / talk page 12:28, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose @TomT0m, Luk3: another perspective on classification of languages is their ancestry - en:Generational_list_of_programming_languages for example, and one could imagine classes for "C-based", "Fortran-based", "LISP-based" etc. groupings of languages. But that's not what we've actually done - looking at the SQID view for programming language (Q9143) we actually already have a good collection of subclasses along the "paradigm" axis, so I think I agree with TomT0m, we should do this via instance of (P31) relationships to eg. functional programming language (Q3839507), object-based language (Q899523) etc. I'm withdrawing my supporting note above, and I think we do not actually need this property here now. ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:54, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose per TomT0m/APS. --Izno (talk) 15:56, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support ~★ nmaia d 13:47, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support --Mikey641 (talk) 10:51, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
WikiProject Informatics has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead.
@Luk3, Pigsonthewing, Tohaomg, ArthurPSmith, YULdigitalpreservation, TomT0m:
- This proposal has multiple pro and con votes. Given that there are more pro votes I lean towards creating it. Does anybody have any objections to that? Is so please speak up. ChristianKl (talk) 17:26, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- @Luk3, Pigsonthewing, Tohaomg, ArthurPSmith, YULdigitalpreservation, TomT0m:
Done ChristianKl (talk) 10:08, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
