1. 13

From https://lobste.rs/s/1nwfty/on_state_pony . Pony is a high performance concurrent programming language: http://www.ponylang.org/

  1.  

  2. 8

    Please no. People make languages all the time. Unless it really becomes popular there’s no sense making a tag for it.

    1. 6

      I think it’s pretty reasonable to have a pony tag if we’re going to expect it to keep coming up.

      I also would support adding an esolang tag for all the articles on things like brainfuck, APL, INTERCAL, forth, Chef, and so on.

      1. 11

        I get what you’re trying to say, but I’m concerned to see APL and forth listed as esoteric because it can make people who don’t know them to group them up together with languages that are intentionally obtuse, jokes, and satires, instead of with useful software development systems.

        1. 3

          Well, the way I figure it, there are basically only a few sorts of langauges that we’d encounter here:

          • Widely-used and/or widely-written-about languages (C, Python, Ruby, Javascript, Clojure, Erlang, Haskell, Lisp, SQL, Go, Java)
          • Flavor-of-the-month new hotness languages (Elm, most Javascript derivatives, maybe Pony here, Nix, whatever the fuck the urbit stack is, Ethereum)
          • Exotic platform specific or application-specific languages (APL, kdb/q, J, Prolog, COBOL, Fortran, MUMPS, Forth, Chef, Postscript, Smalltalk, Ada, Eiffel, Modula-x)
          • Joke languages and turing tarpits (Malborge, INTERCAL, brainfuck and friends, Piet, x86 assembly)

          So, what we don’t want to do is add a tag for every programming language. Least of all because we don’t want to leave out new stuff or waste a tag on some weird variant of left-handed object-coded Smalltalk.

          We also don’t want to leave submissions having primarily to do with a single language unmarked as such–an article on a Forth interpreter doesn’t really fall neatly into compilers (interpreters aren’t), compsci (no longer academic enough), hardware (closest but not really), software (unless it’s a new release). The best we get is probably api (which is wrong because it’s the wrong problem domain) or programming (because it involves computers somehow.

          (Incidentally, this sort of reasoning is why I am super bitchy when people just slather random tags on things and fail to use the correct ones–e.g., not marking submissions about releases using the software tag!)

          We don’t want to make a new tag for every language. We also don’t want to leave things untagged until a tag becomes available if they could at least fit in a broader category (say, languages). It’s tricky.

          Also note that the “new hotness” languages can either wane in popularity or become widely used, so their path to tagdom is pretty straightforward.

          ~

          I see your point about calling something like Forth esoteric, but…it is. So is Prolog, and Ada and Smalltalk and all sorts of other excellent languages that just aren’t used commonly. Some languages will never be popular, or will never be popular again.

          If it helps you sleep better at night, consider that all languages in production–as they are used for things they weren’t initially designed for–become satires of their own practices.

        2. 2

          Yes, but will the trend last? I recognize that Pony is being discussed a lot. However, unless it starts getting used, we may have to remove that tag in the future. Not really a big deal, I’m just pointing out that we haven’t yet seen any indication that it’ll stick around.

        3. 15

          Given we see a lot of languages popping up, we could maybe have a general “plt” tag for everything related to programming language theory. I see no reason to add a specific tag for some brony language that hasn’t had any traction lately anyway.

          1. 2

            I second that, people make languages all the time, there is no point to pollute the namespace with langs that maybe see a couple articles every odd month but it still is nice to have said articles so a generic ‘plt’ or similar tag might actually be the way to go.

            1. 2

              I also agree that we are remiss in not having a tag specifically for PLT stuff.

            2. 4

              maybe something like “emerging languages” instead?

              1. 3

                new shiny.