Template talk:Infobox programming language

message: I think there should be a "Similar/alternative languages" item in this infobox. How do I make that happen? -Barry- 03:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone in IRC just told me I should edit this page. If that's all that's needed to use the added item in another article, it should be mentioned that this article isn't just documentation on how to use the infobox. It actually allows you to change how the template works in the article. -Barry- 04:14, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Didn't work. Still need to know how to change the template. -Barry- 04:24, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Similar/Alternative languages 

message: Is the "Turing complete" item really necessary?  As the article on Turing completeness says, "Most programming languages, conventional and unconventional, are Turing-complete ... It is difficult to find examples of non-Turing complete languages".  Are there any languages that have articles where the value of this item would be "no"?  If not, isn't it somewhat superfluous?  Oli Filth(talk|contribs) 08:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we please lose the "turing complete" thing, per Oli Filth?! It's a silly and unnecessary distraction.  The vast majority of PLs are Turing complete.  It's definitely noteworthy in the articles of those few that are not, but Charity (programming language) or SQL-92 can note that fact in their leads.  We don't use fields for topics where 99% of the uses share a value (let alone for a boolean value).... it would be like adding a field for "Text based": there are a few PLs that use icons rather than text, but not enough to change the box.  Or probably even "Non-English keywords" is sufficiently rare not to get a field, as another example. LotLE×talk 21:05, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turing complete? 

message: You know, I've noticed that most programming language articles include the basic 'hello world' construction for that language.  it strikes me as a bit silly to have a separate section for that in these articles, and I'm thinking we should move them into the infobox.  I'll add a parameter and post an example here, so you can see the effect.  --Ludwigs2 16:54, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: (A) Some Hello Worlds are so verbose they would bloat the infobox (I'm looking at you, Java!) (B) The Hello Worlds are often accompanied by explanatory prose, thus this field will either duplicate the code or will cause the example and its prose to become separated. --Cybercobra (talk) 00:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

text: Hello World examples are rarely this compact, and don't really fit the at-a-glance nature of infobox templates. There's nothing wrong with them being article boilerplate; the infobox doesn't need to cover everything that the article does. Conversely, the examples certainly should not be moved to the infobox, as infoboxes are only meant to be summaries and articles should stand alone fine without them. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  'hello world' addition 

message: I assume this field is supposed to described the language used to implement another language, and not a field in which to put the name of the language being described. I changed the label of this field to "Implementation langauge" but left the field's name in the template the same. 75.186.5.185 (talk) 03:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That filed doesn't make sense to me. A programming language doesn't have any implementation language, because it can (and usually does) have multiple implementations, written in various languages. Do you think this field makes sense or should it be removed? Svick (talk) 21:41, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally think it's better to remove it and leave any descriptions of implementation languages in the article body.  When you have multiple implementations with different languages used to implement each (think CPython vs Jython vs IronPython for example) trying to convey this in an infobox field would just look messy.  Additionally, where I've seen the field already used -- in the entries for Rust, Scala, Haxe and OCaml -- the information provided is wrong anyway! Thanks. Hexene (talk) 18:20, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Programming language" label in a "programming language" infobox? 

message: I'd like to add TIOBE rank as one field of this template as I often find figures with // of a company infobox quite informative. Here are the top 20 languages:
#  C
#  Java
#  Objective-C
#  C++
#  C#
#  PHP
#  (Visual) Basic
#  Python
#  Perl
#  Ruby
#  JavaScript
#  Delphi/Object Pascal
#  Lisp
#  Pascal
#  Visual Basic .NET
#  Ada
#  MATLAB
#  Lua
#  Assembly
#  PL/SQL
I know that this might be as controversial as the use of Alexa rank in a website infobox, but I'd like to go ahead in a month or two unless there is a Oppose here. — Kennyluck (talk) 07:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  TOBIE rank 

message: Is there a definition of what is meant by the 'year' field?  For example, Rust began as a single-person effort in 2006, had an official unveiling and public mailing list created in 2010, and made its first numbered release (0.1) in 2012, so which should it use?  Thanks! Hexene (talk) 14:14, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Year 

message: Can we come up with a way to add spacing around the logo/caption in C (programming language) without using hacks like multiple br tags?  seems like if the spacing is that useful, we should add it to the infobox directly. Frietjes (talk) 14:04, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spacing 

message: Ping  and , who else? I found the issue at Special:Diff/742033177. 80.221.159.67 (talk) 07:48, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the notice. The issue seems to have been introduced in Special:Diff/736291678, so I'll let Codename Lisa handle it. --Waldir talk 12:50, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:   Call me any time if you had more problems. —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 13:41, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{para|latest test version}} and {{para|latest test date}} aliases no longer work 

message: What's the purpose of scope? It will be useful to have some concrete examples. It's not very clear from the definition given.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsamwrites (talk • contribs) 11:49, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples of scope 

message: A field for memory management usage type will be useful: garbage collector, counting references ...(04/2017) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.184.74.184 (talk • contribs) 
: NM 00:58, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Memory Management (04/2017) 

message: How about adding a parameter for specifying the package managers (official and unoffical) of the langauge? Galzigler (talk) 14:31, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Package managers 

message: I think it would be useful to add an optional introduced_constructs section to the infobox. For example,  appears in the article on Simula. It seems to me that this information would be both useful and compact enough to fit in the infobox.
Bhbuehler (talk) 03:57, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduced Constructs 

message: I think we could add a |country_of_origin or |origin field to show where the language was developed. We already tell who developed or created it but not where they are from. We also show the country of origin of a lot of products and productions in other templates, so knowing where a programming language comes from might be relevant. 200.242.43.202 (talk) 15:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: I don't think that's information that would really ever be relevant for the infobox of a programming language. For a random example, the fact that Guido van Rossum is Dutch isn't even mentioned in the prose of Python (programming language). It could plausibly be mentioned in the history section, but a factoid like that I don't think is relevant enough for an infobox. Maybe others will disagree with me though. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 15:29, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  personally I think it's relevant to know where it came from or where it was developed because that can explain the context of why they decided to create a certain language or what kind of contribution they wanted to make to that environment. For example, the Ada programming language was created for military purposes by a team hired by the US Department of Defense (Lua is also an example of a language created from a locally sourced need). However, I don't know if my argument is good enough to justify adding the field I proposed. 200.242.43.202 (talk) 17:15, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Those two example are interesting, I do admit. Personally I still don't think there's really a use case for it, but if anyone else disagrees with me feel free to add it in. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 06:03, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 2 August 2021 

message: Thank you for making this infobox. I've enjoyed navigating the "influenced" and "influenced by" crosslinks to understand the origins of computer languages.
I want to ask for advice. The languages I've found so far under shell script such as Bourne Shell, Bash, Zsh, etc. currently have the Template:Infobox software. These languages have influenced and were influenced by languages that use the Template:Infobox_programming_language.
I'm guessing the reason why the shell scripts don't have this infobox, is because the words are simultaneously used for the software and for the computer language.
Would you think it would be proper to move these pages to use Template:Infobox_programming_language instead? Or, would it make more sense maybe to try to extend Template:Infobox software to use the fields "influenced" and "influenced by"? What are your thoughts here? 'wɪnd (talk) 08:14, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shell scripting