Re: text equation

I must say, none of those defintions, with the exception of the 1st generation
language, is what anyone used in the 70's when I was learning programming.

In the 70's people were talking about 3rd generation languages that were
yet to come, while programming in Borland Pascal, Microsoft C, FORTRAN
and COBOL on some main frames etc...

By your definition, these were already 3rd generation languages.  The
generation of languages was not how powerful the language was, but
was the prodigy of previous languages.

It was accepted that the 1st generation languages were the first languages
written, specifically, machine code and assembly.

Second generation languages were the prodigy of that, the C's, FORTRANs,
COBOLs, BASIC, Pascal, etc...

It was accepted that as these languages were invented by using the 1st
generation languages, another generation would come about that would
be much better and could do much more.

And, I believe this was realized in Object Oriented programming, the
prodigy of the original languages.  A 4th generation language, then,
is what we learn from OOPs and create yet, and I don't believe we
yet even know what this is.  When OOPs first came out everyone
said, "Great!  Wonderful!  What the heck is OOPS?"

I remember going to a Microsoft sponsered event for Quick Basic,
around when 7.0 was out.  This was when OOPs was first being
talked about although there was not many compilers that even attempted
it.  Someone asked the Microsoft representive, "When is Quick Basic
going to have OOPs?"  The Microsoft representitive snorted in disgust
and said something to the effect of "OOPs, why is everyone talking about
that?  You don't need it.".  Then he said, and I remember his words
distinctly, "Who here knows what OOPs is?".  Deadly quiet filled the room.
Everyone looked at everyone else yet absolutely no one had even
the slightest clue what Object Oriented Programming was, how it
was used, how it could help them program, or anything.  The
representitive then said something like "See?  Why do you need
something that you don't even know what it is?".

There will come the next latest and greatest thing.  Whatever it is called.
And everyone will be talking about it how it will revolutionize the
programming industry.  And absolutely no one will know what the
heck it is except for the people developing it.  Then it will start
coming out in the prodigy of OOPs, and be the next generation
language.

What you described here, Kaynor, is more the higher level language
tiers.  Instead of 1GL/2GL/3GL/4GL and 5GL consider them low
level, low middle level, middle level, high middle level and high level
languages.

But, as I stated before, I don't think that langauges can even be
looked at as being higher than any other anymore.  They have all
matured.  Even the prodigal son Basic.

Regards,

Jim Langston

Kaynor@aol.com wrote:

> Hi,
> These are some inventive definitions, but let's not erase the classic
> definitions of language levels--some of us wrote machine code and assembler
> source!  Here is how Whatis.com defines 1GL/2GL/3GL/4GL/5GL:
>
> "In the computer industry, these abbreviations are widely used to represent
> major steps or "generations" in the evolution of programming
> languages.
>
> 1GL or first-generation language was (and still is) machine language or the
> level of instructions and data that the processor is actually given to work
> on (which in
> conventional computers is a string of 0s and 1s).
>
> 2GL or second-generation language is assembler (sometimes called "assembly")
> language. A typical 2GL instruction looks like this:
>
>                  ADD    12,8
>
> An assembler converts the assembler language statements into machine
> language.
>
> 3GL or third-generation language is a "high-level" programming language, such
> as PL/I, C, or Java. Java language statements look like this:
>
> public boolean handleEvent (Event evt) {
>             switch (evt.id)  {
>                  case Event.ACTION_EVENT:  {
>                          if ("Try me" .equald(evt.arg)) {
>
> A compiler converts the statements of a specific high-level programming
> language into machine language. (In the case of Java, the output is called
> bytecode, which is
> converted into appropriate machine language by a Java virtual machine that
> runs as part of an operating system platform.) A 3GL language requires a
> considerable
> amount of programming knowledge.
>
> 4GL or fourth-generation language is designed to be closer to natural
> language than a 3GL language. Languages for accessing databases are often
> described as
> 4GLs. A 4GL language statement might look like this:
>
>      EXTRACT ALL CUSTOMERS WHERE "PREVIOUS PURCHASES" TOTAL MORE THAN $1000
>
> 5GL or fifth-generation language is programming that uses a visual or
> graphical development interface to create source language that is usually
> compiled with a 3GL
> or 4GL language compiler. Microsoft, Borland, IBM, and other companies make
> 5GL visual programming products for developing applications in Java, for
> example.
> Visual programming allows you to easily envision object-oriented class
> hierarchies and drag icons to assemble program components. Microbrew AppWare
> and
> IBM's VisualAge for Java are examples of 5GL "languages." "
>
> --Chapin Kaynor
>
> > Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 14:13:57 -0600
> > From: "L. S. Russell" <leslier@datrek.com>
> > Subject: Re: text equation
>  >
>  >Fujitsu has a version of Fortran which implements objects.
>  >And I disagree with you that, because languages have advanced to the current
>  >level that langugages like dylan, algol, pascal, and oberon are now to be
>  >considered low level languages. And where did you come up with the term mid
>  >level?
>  >Asm is a low level language because it lacks strong typing (I hope I dont
> start a
>  >,thread on typing ! ) it also lacks builtin functions for string handeling,
> and
>  >high math like abs(), cos() ...
>  >We can say, I think, that a high level language is one which is most
> abstract and
>  >bears the least obvious correspondence between the language syntactic
> structure
>  >and the machine code. In this definition the NUMBER of machine instructions
> bears
>  >no relevance.
>  >A high level language is not called a high level language because it
> generates a
>  >huge wad of  machine code when compiled. It is so called because it it
> bears a
>  >closer resemblance to human language than to machine language. There is no
> such
>  > thing as a mid level language. pshaw!
>  >
>  >A 3GL is another level inserted between human readable language and and
> machine
>  >readable. 3GL's are inserted between, lets say english and RPG (in the case
> of
>  >AS/SET) and the 3GL generates NOT compiled machine code but pre-compiled RPG
>  >(language code). This AS/SET (3GL) generated RPG is then compiled into
> machine
>  >code.
>  >
>  >3GL's add a layer of abstraction if you want to call it that, in that a
>  >programmer need not learn RPG, or C, or C++ in order to generate code in
> these
>  >languages.
>
>  >Jim Langston wrote:
>
>  >> I tend to agree with this timeline, but you also have to
>  >> look at the fact that in the 1960's Algol would of been
>  >> considered a high level language, but if you take that same
>  >>> Algol now it is considered quite a low level language.
>  >>
>  >> I think that the terms low, middle and high level are two
>  >> abstract.  I think that's where the generation terms came
>  >> from.  I remember in the 70's and 80's everyone was
>  >> talking about 3rd generation languages that would come
>  >> along soon.  I guess they are here with OOPs and such.
>  >>
>  >> I think I was thinking more along the lines of 3rd generation
>  >> languages being high level, 2nd generation being middle level,
>  >> and 1st generation being low level.
>  >>
>  >> But heck, it's just not that simple anymore.  Languages can
>  >> just do so much and have so many differences maybe the
>  >> concepts of low level and high level languages have become
>  >> obsolete.  Although everyone would agree that Assembly would
>  >> be a low level language by any definition.
>  >>
>  >> Have we come to the age where assembly is low level, and all
>  >> other programming languages are now high level?
>  >>
>  >> boldt@ca.ibm.com wrote:
>  >>
>  > > <SNIP>
>  > > 1940's - bare hardware
>  > > 1950's - operations were abstracted - Fortran
>  > > 1960's - control structures were abstracted - Algol
>  > > 1970's - data structures were abstracted - Pascal, C
>  > > 1980's - module interfaces were abstracted - Modula
>  > > 1990's - abstraction of objects - C++, Java
>  >
>  > <SNIP>
>  >
>  > Remember Delphi (Pascal), VB (Basic), and just about
>  > every language that does objects now.  Although I tend
>  > to doubt if Fortran or Cobol does objects, and I've yet to
>  > see an object in RPG.
>  >
>  > Does that mean RPG is stuck in the 80's?
>  >
>  > Regards,
>  >
>  > Jim Langston
>  > >>
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
> +---

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---