There are quite some pages claiming, that <Language x>Is<Language y>[PlusPlus?|MinusMinus?].
I think that is an OverSimplification in most cases, and as such may stress a point, but subdue many others. Clearly most languages are related by influences from other languages or are even directly descended from each other. There are quite some nice diagrams about this and I remember a WikiPage using GraphViz to graph these relations.
Following these relations you can obviously reach every other language by following a sufficient number of (PlusPlus
?|MinusMinus
?)*.
Disagreed, only some can reasonably be said to be thus related.
- Its title is as quoted above - EveryLanguageFixesSomething. It got removed by its originator because of the endless, pedantic, unenlightening, unenlighted, nit-picking that ensued.
- Come to think of it, weren't you the author? It went away during a long absence of mine, so I missed its removal. Pity, I liked the page, although yes, even last time I saw it, discussion was going downhill. I always assumed the discussion would eventually get refactored after LetHotPagesCool. I seem to recall seeing it cited off-wiki, too. Anyway, considering the irony about bickering, I replaced my critique here (and ensuing discussion) with the mild comment above. Thanks for your feedback.
I have no opinion on the Ruby... pages. CeePlusPlusMinusMinus, on the other hand, is quite literally accurate. It was the way the creators of Java described their creation while doing it. While SmalltalkMinusMinus is more humorous, it is still quite specific to Java and still mostly accurate. This nomenclature reflects a historical fact about Java. Java was quite intentionally intended to provide Smalltalk functionality with C-like syntax. I don't know as much about the origins of Ruby, so I don't know whether the parallel construction works for Ruby. -- TomStambaugh
See also http:wiki?search=MinusMinus, EverythingIsa
CategoryProgrammingLanguage CategoryProgrammingLanguageComparisons CategoryNotaProgrammingLanguage