C Isn't The Most Popular Programming Language, JavaScript Is (networkworld.com)

An anonymous reader quotes Network World: U.K.-based technology analyst firm RedMonk just released the latest version of its biannual rankings of programming languages, and once again JavaScript tops the list, followed by Java and PHP. Those are same three languages that topped RedMonk's list in January. In fact, the entire top 10 remains the same as it was it was six months ago...
Python ranked #4 on RedMonk's list, while the survey found a three-way tie for fifth place between Ruby, C#, and C++, with C coming in at #9 (ranking just below CSS). Network World argues that while change comes slowly, "if you go back deeper into RedMonk's rankings, you can see slow, ongoing ascents from languages such as Go, Swift and even TypeScript."

Interestingly, an earlier ranking by the IEEE declared C to be the top programming language of 2016, followed by Java, Python, C++, and R. But RedMonk's methodology involves studying the prevalence of each language on both Stack Overflow and GitHub, a correlation which "we believe to be predictive of future use, hence their value."

Comments

No

[Anonymous Coward]

XYZ is the most popular programming language.

Re:No

[saloomy]

Javascript, OK. PHP yes, and Java Yes. How the hell is CSS a programming language?? Is a conf file a language? If writing a document (like HTML) is a language, then Excel is probably the most popular, followed by MS Word.

Re:No

[Anonymous Coward]

XYZ is the most popular programming language.

Yes, I absolutely adore XYZ Yanks Zippers. It's the best language for zipper yanking!

Re:No

[Anonymous Coward]

And don't forget about ABC. ABC Buttons Collars!

Re:No

[TheRaven64]

How the hell is CSS a programming language?

CSS 3 selectors are a Turing-complete language (and, in WebKit at least, have their own JIT in the browser). Of course, using it as such would be completely insane...

Re:No

[luis_a_espinal]

Javascript, OK. PHP yes, and Java Yes. How the hell is CSS a programming language?? Is a conf file a language? If writing a document (like HTML) is a language, then Excel is probably the most popular, followed by MS Word.

I do think CSS and Excel (and to a point, HTML) are programming languages, but only as very domain specific ones. I never grasped that Excel was indeed a DSL until I got familiar with Fowler's book and writings on the subject. Excel is the only one that could stand on its own whereas CSS and HTML are just declarative non-turing-complete DSLs for configuration and rendering.

So I don't have an issue seeing CSS and HTML as programming languages (albeit with extremely narrow applications.)

I do agree with you in having a list that combines general purpose turing complete programming languages with narrow-field DSLs. It's like making a list of artillery pieces and bayonets and sorts them in order of popularity.

Re:No

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Damn scriptkiddies ruined everything. Get off my lawn.

Nitrous oxide

[FrankHaynes]

is more popular than oxygen. Millions have already switched!!

Re:Nitrous oxide

[sensei moreh]

Nitrogen is more popular than oxygen by a factor of about 3.7

Re:Nitrous oxide

[Crashmarik]

It's a gas. I am laughing I hadn't switched before.

Re:Nitrous oxide

[ShanghaiBill]

Nitrogen is more popular than oxygen by a factor of about 3.7

Only if you look at just the atmosphere. If you include the lithosphere and the oceans, oxygen wins by a landslide. In the universe, oxygen is about ten times as common. But as a consolation prize, nitrogen-14 is by far the most common substance with an odd number of both protons and neutrons.

What does any of this have to do with programming languages?

Re:Nitrous oxide

[sensei moreh]

What does any of this have to do with programming languages?

This has absolutely nothing to do with programming languages. Why should it? - this is a slashdot discussion

Re:Nitrous oxide

[mr_mischief]

OP brought up CSS, so it was never about just programming languages.

Yes, CSS3 is Turing complete. Likewise, a the cooling fan in my PC's power supply moves itself but is not an automobile.

JavaScript rules!

[tchjsa11]

Good. Don't judge me, JavaScript has always been my programming language of choice, and always will be.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[MightyMartian]

I can't help it. I'm judging you. I can understand why someone has to use JS (I've been one of those on far too many occasions), but to actually identify it as your language of choice seems bizarre to me.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember when you didn't have to compile a dozen things to read a friggin webpage. Instead you rendered it. And despite what the naysayers will howl, yes we did in fact do all the same shit back in 1998. By that I mean, e-commerce, videos, and even sites like slashdot. And we did it a hell of a lot faster and more efficiently.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[angel'o'sphere]

JavaScript is the only class less, prototype based programming language in wide use.
So it is an extremely powerful language with arguable a bit painful syntax (to exploit those features).
On the other hand, as long as you don't really want to dig deep into it, it is just like C without types.
// assuming length, src and dst are arrays declared somewhere
        for (/* int */ i=0; i < length; i++) {
              dst[i] = src[i]; // semicolon optional
      }

90% of JavaScript just looks like C, so no idea why people hate it.

OH!! You mean the integration in the browser? Yeah ... never did any browser side JS, and likely never will.

You know, in JS you can "call" a function just like in C.
But you can also "new" it, and have an object ... an instance of the "class" the function is describing, with nested functions (unlike C ;D ) as methods.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[Z80a]

Javascript is the necessary evil, as you need something to execute code to run more complex webpages.
Java on other hand is the unnecessary evil people still use due being trendy.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[Anonymous Coward]

But the porn was way crapper. So there's that.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[tepples]

If it's just a web "page", a document for reading as opposed to an actual web application, you don't need updates smaller than a full page. And if you don't need fine-grained updates, you don't really need JavaScript. Instead, the server can create the final DOM, serialize that DOM to HTML, and send the HTML to the browser. Form prevalidation can use the new HTML5 input types.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[MillionthMonkey]

JavaScript is a lot like Hillary- it's been around for decades, nobody is terribly impressed by it, everyone is tired of it, it's weakly typed, it's just barely tolerable, it's only around because of historical accidents in the nineties, and although it has its diehard fans, most people just grumble with it and put up with it. But it will continue to prevail for years because at this point there simply is no viable alternative.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[MouseTheLuckyDog]

I had a machine with 512M, but could have gotten by on 128M. On that 128M machine my broswer might use 10% of the memory not 60%, and only small amounts of CPU time.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[mwvdlee]

There was a time when we get by without electricity at all. Commerce, theater plays and even sites like "the local pub" worked real-time at life-like quality.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[Anonymous Coward]

And once the project grows beyond a certain size the flexibility makes it unmaintainable, just like basic.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[Anonymous Coward]

JavaScript still has its reputation from the end of 90's early 2000 uses of putting crap in tags like back when that was all the crazy which lots of in line java script on tags and thinking disabling left click prevents you from stealing images.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[Anonymous Coward]

> a bit painful syntax

Holy Shit dude ... any language that needs "===" is seriously fucked up. Don't forget the "!!" to coerce into a binary type.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[devent]

- "JavaScript is the only class less, prototype based programming language in wide use."
That's not really have any value in and out itself.
- "So it is an extremely powerful language with arguable a bit painful syntax (to exploit those features)."
There are many powerful languages with good syntax.
- "90% of JavaScript just looks like C, so no idea why people hate it."
Because of the many many bugs.
- "OH!! You mean the integration in the browser? Yeah ... never did any browser side JS, and likely never will."
Browser integration is the only reason JS is popular.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget a lot of dumb things too, like how javascript interprets all numbers as floating points. So a for loop, that uses integer numerics, is adding 1 to a floating point, horrendously slow. Also, javascript has no way to guarantee interfaces, for example, in any function you write, you have to manually test for each ability of the interface rather than have javascript do it for you. This is a very hackish approach and if you make a change to the "interface" you have to go and change every function that tests for that interface and add/remove the new constraints. Not to mention the ASI debacle.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[angel'o'sphere]

Plenty of pointless points you make.

- "JavaScript is the only class less, prototype based programming language in wide use."
That's not really have any value in and out itself.
Of course it has ... it just escapes you as you never tried it.

- "So it is an extremely powerful language with arguable a bit painful syntax (to exploit those features)."
There are many powerful languages with good syntax.
You failed to name one ... actually thinking about it, most languages except Pascal/Modula/Oberon have an awful syntax. Perhaps Python is ok.

- "90% of JavaScript just looks like C, so no idea why people hate it."
Because of the many many bugs.
The bugs of what?

- "OH!! You mean the integration in the browser? Yeah ... never did any browser side JS, and likely never will."
Browser integration is the only reason JS is popular.
Nope ... plenty of tools are written in JavaScript ... I e.g. use it to script applications like embedded debuggers. Then we have the growing server faction around node.js and similar use cases.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[devent]

- "Of course it has ... it just escapes you as you never tried it."
That's a reply like from a religious person. "the love of God escapes you as you never tried it"
- "You failed to name one ... "
Like every other language that is not JS.
All languages have the same power, so obviously I was talking about them.
- "The bugs of what?"
===, the automatic semicolon, "0" = true, and other bugs like the IEEE 754 standard.
- "Nope ... plenty of tools are written in JavaScript ..."
From 0.15% to 0.20% in a year.
https://w3techs.com/technologi...
Java (Tomcat), from 0.52% to 0.57%
https://w3techs.com/technologi...
So, there are way more Java tools written in a year than for Node.js.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[angel'o'sphere]

I doubt you know from your head a language that has prototype inheritance ...

So: none of "any other language" comes even close to JavaScript.

No idea what you mean with "automatic semicolon", in JavaScript semicolons are optional.

The links you post are meaningless, perhaps you should read their headlines?

"Usage statistics and market share of Node.js for websites"

The fact that you don't like the language does not make the language inferior.

The type hole around string, int and bool comparison is in fact a mess. That is why people use CoffeeScript or TypeScript instead.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[Anonymous Coward]

> No idea what you mean with "automatic semicolon", in JavaScript semicolons are optional.

They really aren't but you're better off using them, lest the interpreter decide to put them where you don't want them.

Crockford included it in his list of JavaScript's "awful parts."

Re:JavaScript rules!

[devent]

- "I doubt you know from your head a language that has prototype inheritance ..."
Again, it's not a good thing in and out itself. Other languages have other good features, it all depends how can I have my work done.
I bet JavaScript can't access OpenGL, it needs to go through WebGL and other slow and cumbersome APIs.
JavaScript put the web at least 10 years behind what it could have been. UI in JS are slow and unresponsive, that's in part the fault of JS itself.
What do prototype inheritance me any good, if the JS code puts my CPU at 30% and makes my whole browser unresponsive.
The browsers devs reacted by putting each tab into a new process. But again, that's just an attempt to fix the symptoms and not the decease.
The W3C should have just released a byte code standard, and we could be free of JS (you could still use JS), and the browser devs could just concentrate on optimizing the byte code, instead of writing one slow JS parser after another.

- "The fact that you don't like the language does not make the language inferior."
No, the bugs do. And that after 20 years of JS we still have slow and unresponsive UIs.

- "No idea what you mean with "automatic semicolon", in JavaScript semicolons are optional."
You have really no clue about JS. The parser puts semicolons automatically into your code, that's the reasons why they are optional for you.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[devent]

Btw, I really don't get how devs are all in denial about the fact that JS is still slow as shit.
Go to http://demo.elastic.co/
If I do anything on the graphs (like moving the mouse cursor over a graph), it's a noticeable lag in the UI, and my CPU goes up to 20% for Firefox.
A native app (in any language) would be at 0-1% CPU and there would be no lag at all.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[Anonymous Coward]

You're viewing the wrong demos

Re:JavaScript rules!

[devent]

The demo (angry bots) still uses about 30% of my CPU resources. It doesn't lag because the graphic is all done by the GPU by OpenGL, but JS still sucks. On a phone it will drain the battery way faster than a native application.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[Noelle05]

these guys think so too! http://goo.gl/ayBdn3

Re:JavaScript rules!

[angel'o'sphere]

You are stuck in 15 years outdated ideas (which mostly are inaccurate).

You talk about web technology, I talked about the language.

If you don't like the language don't use it.

Your arguments make no real sense in our times. JavaScript is now in its 6th reincarnation, it is extremely fast and much safer has less bugs etc.

Ofc there could be other scripting languages for browsers ... but they never got traction and the ones we use in our days as alternatives are compiled to JavaScriot anyway.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[angel'o'sphere]

Because it is not slow?
Most Javascript intepreters compile to machine code in our days.

How can you be in such a denial that you don't know that? The general speed difference to C/C++ is only 10% often nearly on par, there are not many benchmarks where Apples, Googles or MS's Enigen is far behind.

You seem not to get it: some people like the language that is why they use it. And: if you want to have the same technology on frontend and backend it makes sense to use node.js on the backend.

From a language designer standpoint it is a fine language, a few quirks, yes. That is why I learn CoffeeScript. Unfortunately most stuff I use JavaScript in as in the Hypercard clone "NovoCard" I can not load other JavaScript libraries or even CoffeeScript.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[devent]

- "Your arguments make no real sense in our times. JavaScript is now in its 6th reincarnation, it is extremely fast and much safer has less bugs etc."
Citation needed. It still have the same bugs, and it's still very slow. Even the WebGL demos max out my CPU core. A native app would be around 1% of my CPU. The slowness is inherent to JS, I don't think the devs are incompetent.

- "Ofc there could be other scripting languages for browsers ... but they never got traction and the ones we use in our days as alternatives are compiled to JavaScriot anyway."
They never got traction because the W3C and the browsers devs are drinking the JS cool-aid. And because JS would die very fast if the browser devs would allow for any other language. For their benefit, they have their reasons of course. To have just one language for the Web is of course a benefit.

Again, the simpler solution would be to have a byte code standard, like the JVM have. Since the JS engines are all VMs anyway, it wouldn't be a problem. Another solution would be to fix JS, but that would brake a lot of web sites so that will never happen.

Yes, current alternative languages must compile to JS, so there is little or no benefit for using them. So it's no wonder they don't get any traction.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[devent]

- "Because it is not slow?"
If a JS web site like the Kibana dashboard maxes out my CPU core (I have an Intel 5), how is it not slow?
Compared to a native application that would use up max. 3% to 10% of my CPU.

- "You seem not to get it: some people like the language that is why they use it. And: if you want to have the same technology on frontend and backend it makes sense to use node.js on the backend."
Use whatever you like. I'm discussing facts.

- "From a language designer standpoint it is a fine language, a few quirks, yes."
No. From a language designer standpoint it's like the worst language out there, maybe worse than even PHP. Even Brainfuck is better.
The need for === alone makes it the worst language.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[angel'o'sphere]

Yes, current alternative languages must compile to JS, so there is little or no benefit for using them. So it's no wonder they don't get any traction.

That was not the point.
The languages that are compiled to JS are indeed getting traction.

However the browser simply should not know, and does not need to know, with what it is scripted. Be it Python or PERL. You only need a way to load a script instantiate the correct runtime environment / VM and expose the DOM and browser API to the script.

- "Your arguments make no real sense in our times. JavaScript is now in its 6th reincarnation, it is extremely fast and much safer has less bugs etc."
Citation needed. It still have the same bugs, and it's still very slow. Even the WebGL demos max out my CPU core. A native app would be around 1% of my CPU. The slowness is inherent to JS, I don't think the devs are incompetent.
So you have a single benchmark that is slow?

Probably try another JavaScript VM?

Sorry, there is no citation needed for common knowledge, even you lack it :D /. alone is full with articles about the super fast JS implementations: since years. But perhaps you are new here.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[angel'o'sphere]

I don't know why "maxing out the CPU" is an argument for you.

Probably it is running a JS Bitcoin miner and you are to dumb to realize it?

The need for === alone makes it the worst language.
Wow, that is a brain dead argument. So Java should get rid of the Object.equals() method? And C++ of "operator ==()"?

Re:JavaScript rules!

[holz.name]

- "However the browser simply should not know, and does not need to know, with what it is scripted. Be it Python or PERL. You only need a way to load a script instantiate the correct runtime environment / VM and expose the DOM and browser API to the script"

Yes, I agree. We should stop pushing JS and make a byte code standard so that any language can be supported. JS in production is currently akin to byte code anyway. I mean, try to read that https://code.jquery.com/jquery... it's a machine language in ASCII.

- "Probably try another JavaScript VM?"

How can I try another JS VM for Firefox?

- " alone is full with articles about the super fast JS implementations: since years."

Why doesn't Firefox use them? Again, every JS demo or production site needs to max out my CPU for the most basic tasks, whereas a native app would use maybe 5%.

Re:JavaScript rules!

[angel'o'sphere]

I don't know what you want to do or test, but I simply would download a JS engine and start the script via that engine instead of relying on FireFox.

The FireFox engine is considered quite fast, too. So perhaps simply the programs/scripts you try are badly written? Or the WebGL implementation is bollocks?

It is difficult to find "interesting" benchmarks (e.g. people not knowing to use -O flags for C compilers and having simple loops to sum up a number and the compiler replaces it by a formula), but this one is interesting: http://www.stefankrause.net/wp...

CSS?

[Khyber]

CSS is hardly a programming language. Thus, RedMonk can be safely ignored.

Re:CSS?

[Anonymous Coward]

CSS might be Turing complete, but RedMonk are morons if they think CSS's popularity is based on it's use as a programming language.

Re:CSS?

[TapeCutter]

Haven't looked at the IEEE survey but I'm guessing they put C at the top because they don't count all the flavours separately.

Re:CSS?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, apparently Red Monk uses the term "programming" quite loosely while I suspect the IEEE uses it in a more traditional sense (hence why discrepancy). PHP, Javascript, Ruby are all scripting languages. They require an interpreter (i.e.a program that process the written scripts). CSS is a markup language. I guess it could be considered scripting. Again, it requires something to interpret and execute its commands.

Re:CSS?

[Tablizer]

Maybe they found a bug that makes CSS Turing Complete.

Re:CSS?

[phantomfive]

With animations, it must be close.

Re:CSS?

[complete loony]

Apparently CSS & HTML and some user input is turing complete. But that feels like a stretch.

Re:CSS?

[Anonymous Coward]

JavaScript is hardly a programming language either. I mean, I suppose it technically qualifies, but it's such a horrid mess made popular largely by rank amateurs who will never succeed at anything else because nothing else is such a godawful mess that violates pretty much every principle of anything remotely resembling professional practices. Then again I suspect it's quite popular precisely because of those things. Don't need all that book-learning and stuff I guess.

There's good and bad with letting just anybody become a programmer. JavaScript is a prime example of the bad because such an abomination would never have existed otherwise.

Re:CSS?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not supposed to be a programming language, it's a declarative state machine... if it had the capabilities of a fully featured programming language then it would make for a terrible style sheet language.

Javascript

[damiantgordon]

Is this a joke??? JavaScript is a SCRIPTING Language, not a PROGRAMMING language.

Re:Javascript

[chrism238]

Unusual distinction that you make. So where do you stand on the languages Python, the Unix shell, Tcl/Tk, ..... ?

Re:Javascript

[damiantgordon]

Python is a programming language Unix shell e.g. Bourne, is a scripting language Tcl/tk is a scripting language Nothing unusual about this...

Re:Javascript

[damiantgordon]

Look at Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:Javascript

[narcc]

There's no real, objective, distinction. Neither is there a need to make such a distinction. It's an impossible task that serves no purpose.

You're wasting an awful lot of outrage on completely meaningless nonsense. Let it go. You'll feel better.

Re:Javascript

[narcc]

What silly criteria did you use to make those distinctions?

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you create an application from scratch using only Javascript?

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

Where C is on it too. Congrats, no programming languages, only scripting languages. Point well made :-p

Re:Javascript

[MightyMartian]

Can you tell me the precise difference between the two? Sure Python may have JIT, but at the end of the day, it's distributables are plain text files, so it has a lot more in common with sh/ksh/bash than C or Java.

Re:Javascript

[ShanghaiBill]

Look at Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Perhaps you should look at that page yourself. This is the very first sentence (emphasis mine):

This category lists scripting programming languages.

"Scripting" and "programming" are not two different things. Scripting is programming.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

Python is a programming language

Since you want to differentiate between programming languages and scripting languages, when there's really little need as every scripting language is a programming language, it's best you know that Python is a scripting language ;)

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

Is this a joke???

JavaScript is a SCRIPTING Language, not a PROGRAMMING language.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scripting_language

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

How is Python a programming language but Tcl a scripting language? They're both interpreted languages that can do anything.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

Python is compiled to bytecode before it's executed, and python programs can be distributed as just bytecode if you're into that sort of thing.

https://docs.python.org/3/library/dis.html

Re:Javascript

[narcc]

Yes, obviously.

For you kids out there, consider this insane, but completely possible, project: Write a JavaScript compiler in JavaScript, implementing a few API's you'll want for some low-level stuff next. Write an OS in JavaScript, compile it with your compiler. Implement JavaScript in JavaScript, compile it with your JavaScript compiler. Compile your JavaScript compiler, on the OS you wrote in JavaScript, by running your JavaScript compiler in your JavaScript implementation. Now you can compile your OS, from your OS, using a compiler you compiled on your OS. Everything from top to bottom being written in Javascript. Bootstrappy!

Yes, it's a terrible idea. JavaScript is obviously wasn't designed for those sorts of tasks. The point, of course, is that it's possible to do such a thing. I should probably point out that you could do the same thing in just about every other language you dislike. This is CS 101 stuff, kids.

So, if that's how you discriminate between "programming languages" and "scripting languages" you'll find that very few (likely none) of the languages you currently believe to be "scripting languages" qualify as such under your own criteria.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems like you could w/ nodejs..... you also could with bash

Re:Javascript

[angel'o'sphere]

All scripting languages are programming languages.
And considering how JavaScript is used, it is hardly a scripting language anyway. The word "Script" in its name is misleading.
If you want to argue about Scripting languages than ksh, bash, TCL, JCL are scripting languages, JavaScript is far from those in every regard.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

> Python may have JIT, but at the end of the day, it's distributables are plain text files, so it has a lot more in common with sh/ksh/bash than C or Java.

Python applications can be distributed as binary files as .pyc or .pyo. IronPython and Jython can compile to .NET and JVM respectively.

There is no reason that C cannot be 'scripting language' by your 'definition'. QuickC works like Python where the source code is compiled to byte code and then run just as Python usually does.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, using Node for example, you can write an very large application. In fact, many servers are now exclusively JavaScript. It's not just a client side scripting language any more. I suggest taking your head out of your rear, looking around and getting familiar with new technology before you become one of those tedious bell-ends whining about how they can't get a job because no-one needs their skills any more.

Re:Javascript

[narcc]

I figured it out. Languages he likes are programming languages. Languages he doesn't like are scripting languages.

Re:Javascript

[Dog-Cow]

Programming, in context, is the act of instructing a general purpose computer how to accomplish a particular task. Scripting languages are used to instruct general purpose computers how to accomplish a task. Thus, scripting languages are programming languages.

You, on the other hand, are an incredible idiot who should no longer be allowed to communicate with people.

Re:Javascript

[Zontar The Mindless]

It's not just a client side scripting language any more.

"Any more"? It never has been. I was doing serverside JS in the 90s with Netscape-SSJS, Classic ASP/JScript, and SpeedScript.

None of which are even around anymore... Thanks. Now I feel old.

Re:Javascript

[leptons]

Yes, I've been creating desktop applications for 10 years using JScript.NET - I can create an .exe GUI application, or a command line utility, or even a .dll - all using javascript. Now there's also NWJS, and Electron which combine nodejs with a chromium browser front-end. It's very easy and VERY powerful.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

I read your name "damaged gordon". Sorry but it somehow sounds right once I read your comment. Python is programming language but Javascript is not but scripting language?? You probably not a programmer

Re:Javascript

[goose-incarnated]

Yes, obviously.

For you kids out there, consider this insane, but completely possible, project: Write a JavaScript compiler in JavaScript, implementing a few API's you'll want for some low-level stuff next. Write an OS in JavaScript, compile it with your compiler. Implement JavaScript in JavaScript, compile it with your JavaScript compiler. Compile your JavaScript compiler, on the OS you wrote in JavaScript, by running your JavaScript compiler in your JavaScript implementation. Now you can compile your OS, from your OS, using a compiler you compiled on your OS. Everything from top to bottom being written in Javascript. Bootstrappy!

Yes, it's a terrible idea. JavaScript is obviously wasn't designed for those sorts of tasks. The point, of course, is that it's possible to do such a thing. I should probably point out that you could do the same thing in just about every other language you dislike. This is CS 101 stuff, kids.

So, if that's how you discriminate between "programming languages" and "scripting languages" you'll find that very few (likely none) of the languages you currently believe to be "scripting languages" qualify as such under your own criteria.

Whew - what a lot of work! Why not just use Javascript to write a C compiler? Then use your C compiler to compile any existing kernel/system?

Re: Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

JavaScript has been compiled with a JIT for years now.
It has also been used outside of client-side webdev even longer. (Fully compiled at that)
C can be made scriptable as well.

get your head out your ass.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

As long as it's Turing complete, then it's a programming language. Matters of "scripting language" and "machine compiled language" are a matter of implementation and not an inherent part of the language.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

*languages he is only capable of using at the level of a 13 year old, exposing him for the script kiddie he is, are languages he doesn't like

Re:Javascript

[luis_a_espinal]

Is this a joke??? JavaScript is a SCRIPTING Language, not a PROGRAMMING language.

In 20 years of doing this shit for a living (C/C++, VB, FoxPro, Java, C#, Python, Assembly, etc.) I have never heard such a ridiculous distinction. JavaScript can be run as a scripting language, standalone or embedded just as Python, Ruby, Lua, Erlang or Bash. And unlike Bash (and like Python, Ruby, Lua and/or Erlang), it is also used to build full-blown stand-alone systems.

Scripting is just a programming facet or capability. What a ridiculous and unheard of dichotomy you have there buddy.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it actually possible to write a JavaScript compiler?
I was under the impression that you can keep source code as a string and pass it on, modify and execute.
That sort of requires that the code is run through an interpreter.

Re:Javascript

[slickepott]

I actually did that distinction in the past.. then I grew up. :)
Guess I just learned that the implementation of the language matters more than the language itself.

Re:Javascript

[MightyMartian]

In the old days the divide was between interpreted and compiled languages, but with JIT compilers and virtual machines that distinction has faded somewhat. Still the fact is some languages compile to machine code and are distributed as object files, while some are distributed as plain text or some sort of interpreter code (tokenized or byte code).

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

> every scripting language is a programming language

This.

A "scripting language" is a programming language that targets other programs instead of bare metal/OS.

Re:Javascript

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Damn scriptkiddies ruined everything. Get off may lawn....

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, but JScript is not Javascript. Its some sort of bastard sub/superset of javascript thats not quite there yet.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to mention, as a scripting language, too many people are trying to use it as a server (i.e. HTTP server). Which is fine for development, but terrible for production as the javascript interpreter, will never free memory back to the OS, so the interpreter constantly eats memory. I've seen a node server start at 50megs, and bloat right up to 5-10 gigs of RAM. Not to mention, that because everyone is trying to do this "on-the-fly" building of javascript and html (webpack/browserify), that they could spend months trying to figure out how to get it into a production environment like Apache/LigHTTP/nginx.

Re:Javascript

[david_thornley]

Most top Common Lisp implementations are compilers, and that's pretty much where "eval" (or whatever Javascript has) started. In many cases, the interpretation is done by compiling on the fly.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps you should look at that page yourself. This is the very first sentence (emphasis mine):

This category lists scripting programming languages.

"Scripting" and "programming" are not two different things. Scripting is programming.

I always though of scripting languages as those that don't have support for data structures and programming language do. For instance, bash is a scripting language. Its original use case was lists of commands to run in sequence. C would be a programming language as you build up data structures and evaluate them. The complexity of languages makes it difficult to have one clear mathematically sound rule to divide scripting and programming languages. But I think lumping in Makefiles and bash in with the programming languages like Java, LISP or C doesn't really make any sense. You might disagree however...

Re:Javascript

[flargleblarg]

JavaScript is a SCRIPTING Language, not a PROGRAMMING language.

JavaScript is an interpreted PROGRAMMING language.
If you can't put a shebang line on a .js file and chmod +x the file and run it from the command line, then it isn't a scripting language.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

> If you can't put a shebang line on a .js file and chmod +x the file and run it from the command line, then it isn't a scripting language.

Nonsense.

Lua is a scripting language used in many, many applications and rarely (if at all) from shell.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, flargleblarg, than you have dreamt of in your philosophy."

Re:Javascript

[mr_mischief]

In much common usage a "scripting language" is that one you don't like and a "real programming language" is one you use yourself. People call languages scripting languages as if it's a pejorative. It's sad, really, that they don't understand that their subjective tastes have no bearing on the distinction.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you create an application from scratch using only Javascript?

If you're a Mac user, you could try it with JSCocoa.

Re:Javascript

[michael_wojcik]

All scripting languages are programming languages.

True by definition, I'd say, but there are scripting languages which are not Turing-complete and thus formally less powerful than what people usually consider "programming languages".

For example, CL (Control Language) on older versions of OS/400 had only one iteration construct: iterating over records in a file. And since file sizes were limited, every CL program is guaranteed to halt.[1]

That makes CL not-what-some-would-call-a-programming-language in a different sense than, say, a data-annotation language like HTML4 is.[2] Ultimately, I think, most people say HTML isn't a programming language because it's descriptive, while even CL is inherently imperative; it's a question of the modality you infer from the language.

But terms like "markup language", "scripting language", and "programming language", however common in the industry, aren't terms of art in software development or in computer science.[3] Traditionally (going back to the early decades of multiuser systems), "scripting language" was used for languages intended primarily for coordinating external components. The distinction has long-since blurred, and the terms are now used in broadly overlapping ways.

[1] And thus cannot be Turing-complete.

[2] HTML4 because HTML5 is forever a moving target, and who's to say WHAT-WG won't add full UTM capabilities to it tomorrow. And, yes, I know HTML5+CSS3 blah blah blah.

[3] In some cases they may be used as terms of art, of course, but then the authors are obliged to appeal to a particular definition. There's no broadly-accepted standard.

Re:Javascript

[angel'o'sphere]

No one claims that all "programming languages" need to be "turing complete."

The distinction between scripting language and "real programming language" imho is:
Scripting language is executed from text (yes, might be jitted), has higher level constructs (e.g. pipes and processes in bash) probably has a REPL command line, "real programming languages" are usually compiled, have their abstractions on a different level (words, registers, classes, functions, lists, objects).

Of course both overlap. But calling a Scripting Language a "not a programming language" makes no sense.

Even in your CL example: you are running a program ...does not matter if certain kinds of programs are impossible by design as it is not Turing complete.

Re:Javascript

[michael_wojcik]

No one claims that all "programming languages" need to be "turing complete."

Indeed, no one claimed that. Certainly I didn't.

The distinction between scripting language and "real programming language" imho is:
Scripting language is executed from text (yes, might be jitted), has higher level constructs (e.g. pipes and processes in bash) probably has a REPL command line, "real programming languages" are usually compiled, have their abstractions on a different level (words, registers, classes, functions, lists, objects).

I'd call that a rather arbitrary list, and not to my mind particularly useful, but if it helps you sleep at night...

Of course both overlap.

Because it would be difficult to have only one overlap.

But calling a Scripting Language a "not a programming language" makes no sense.

Clearly it makes sense, or we wouldn't have any grounds for a comprehensible discussion of whether it's a true or useful statement. (An example of a statement that makes no sense is "a scripting language is not purple".) I don't think this mooted "scripting" versus "programming" distinction is sustainable or productive, though, so I'm a bit puzzled why you found it necessary to tell me it isn't.

Even in your CL example: you are running a program ...does not matter if certain kinds of programs are impossible by design as it is not Turing complete.

Well, certainly it matters in some domains, since it determines whether certain computable functions can be implemented in that language. And "running a program" isn't a useful criterion, since it implies a circular definition (a programming language is one that can be used to create a program). But I agree it doesn't matter to the question of whether CL is a programming language.

Indeed, this was rather my point. There's a popular sentiment that HTML, say, is not a programming language, because it's not Turing-complete; I pointed out that there are languages which are intended for writing programs, and which practitioners recognize as programming languages, but which are also not TC. It's not the TC-nature of a language that makes it a programming language. In fact, as is generally the case with natural-language terms that are not well-defined as terms of art, whether something can be called a "programming language" ultimately comes down to whether your audience agrees with that use of the term.

Re:Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

> The distinction between scripting language and "real programming language" imho is:

The only concrete difference between a "scripting language" and a "programming language" is how it's used.

Laungauges

[Wowsers]

Javascript is a "programming language"? So when do we see an OS written in Javascript controlling all aspects of a pc's motherboard, processor etc?

Re:Laungauges

[wonkey_monkey]

Javascript is a "programming language"?

Yes, it is.

So when do we see an OS written in Javascript controlling all aspects of a pc's motherboard, processor etc?

Irrelevant to whether something is a programming language or not.

Re:Laungauges

[narcc]

Why do you think that's impossible?

Re:Laungauges

[Anonymous Coward]

When you can spell "Languages"? The vast majority of programming languages are not suited for controlling motherboards. That doesn't mean they're not programming languages, i.e. languages used to write... programs.

Re:Laungauges

[ArmoredDragon]

Irrelevant to whether something is a programming language or not.

Nevermind that you in theory could do all of that with javascript. It would be inefficient as hell of course, but efficiency doesn't make or break a programming language, otherwise assembly would be the only game in town.

Re: Laungauges

[Anonymous Coward]

Register PIO in a language without raw pointers may be difficult.

Re:Laungauges

[myowntrueself]

Javascript is a "programming language"?

Yes, it is.

So when do we see an OS written in Javascript controlling all aspects of a pc's motherboard, processor etc?

Irrelevant to whether something is a programming language or not.

Some fool is bound to write a virtualization system in Javascript one of these days. Then they can implement an operating system written in Javascript on their virtualization system.

Is there a hardware Javascript engine?

Re: Laungauges

[arth1]

Register PIO in a language without raw pointers may be difficult.

There are forks of JavaScript engines that addresses that, with calls like peek() and poke(). Or you can roll your own library for node.js

But when accessing hardware without a huge overhead, there really aren't many better ways of doing it than C and assembly. (And BCPL for you remaining Amiga aficionados out there.)

Re:Laungauges

[StueyNZ]

Some fool is bound to write a virtualization system in Javascript one of these days.....

A determined fellow did (well nearly, it's a PC emulator in JS - that runs Linux)

Re:Laungauges

[myowntrueself]

Some fool is bound to write a virtualization system in Javascript one of these days.....

A determined fellow did (well nearly, it's a PC emulator in JS - that runs Linux)

Not quite the same. Nice try though. To satisfy my requirements it should provide virtualized hardware to guest operating systems which should require no modifications to their kernel. Potentially running Windows 10 or Ubuntu.

Re:Laungauges

[Anonymous Coward]

Untrue, most programmers can implement more efficient algorithms in languages that are easier to use, and actually obtain higher efficiency than they would in assembly. There is a reason the people that are actually good at assembly both command a premium and don't use it for everything besides just the speed of coding. This is especially true with good optimizing compilers that can have more efficient assembly code than a naive pass at the exact same code written by hand in assembly.

Re:Laungauges

[angel'o'sphere]

It would be inefficient as hell of course ...
Most modern JavaScript engines JIT compile to extremely efficient machine code.
It is very close to C and other "close to the machine" languages.

Re:Laungauges

[tepples]

You need some assembly language to get the processor from real mode into protected or long mode. Therefore, by your "all aspects" definition, C is not a programming language.

Re:Laungauges

[JoeMerchant]

It is very close to C and other "close to the machine" languages.

Getting closer all the time, and still never quite there.

Re:Laungauges

[TheRaven64]

Taking C code, compiling it with Emscripten into JavaScript, then running the result in a modern JavaScript implementation will give you faster code than taking the same C code and compiling it with a C compiler form 10-20 years ago.

Re: Laungauges

[TheRaven64]

Not that hard. JavaScript has TypedArray objects that allow you to have an object that encapsulates a range of memory and allows values to be read from and written to it at arbitrary offsets. The real problem is that JavaScript doesn't have a 64-bit integer type, so you'd have to read a double from the register, write it back to another TypedArray, read it back as two 32-bit integers, and perform your own carry operations.

Re:Laungauges

[serviscope_minor]

Most modern JavaScript engines JIT compile to extremely efficient machine code.
It is very close to C and other "close to the machine" languages.

The Javascript (and Java) JITTers are marvels of engineering, but they're not close to C, C++ or FORTRAN in performance. Sure on some micro benchmarks, it's possible to come very close, but those tend to be pretty simple for-loops.

The problem is aliasing. FORTRAN bans it, C and C++ allow it in some cases and in other very important cases disallow it but declare it's up to the programmer to not break the rules and the compiler may always assume the rules are unbroken.

Re:Laungauges

[Anonymous Coward]

Some link to that test would be appreciated. (Assuming that it isn't just hearsay.)

Re:Laungauges

[Anonymous Coward]

Javascript is a "programming language"? So when do we see an OS written in Javascript controlling all aspects of a pc's motherboard, processor etc?

Ask and ye shall receive. https://os.js.org/

Re:Laungauges

[TheRaven64]

There was a blog post on Surfin' Safari (the WebKit blog) and on the llvm.org blog with a bunch of numbers when they did the FTL implementation. That showed around a 60% overhead for C to JavaScript to LLVM IR to native code with FTL vs C to LLVM IR to native code with clang. 60% is less than the speedup that we've seen in C compilers (and typically less than you'll see for the difference between a modern LLVM or GCC vs something like PCC, except in very IO-bound workloads).

Re:Laungauges

[JoeMerchant]

Taking C code, compiling it with Emscripten into JavaScript, then running the result in a modern JavaScript implementation will give you faster code than taking the same C code and compiling it with a C compiler form 10-20 years ago.

Taking the same function, implementing it in interpreted BASIC and running it in a modern implementation will give you faster code than implementing the same function in the most optimized assembly code from 10, especially 20 years ago.

We don't measure CPU clocks in single digit MHz anymore.

Re:Laungauges

[Anonymous Coward]

Taking the same function, implementing it in interpreted BASIC and running it in a modern implementation will give you faster code than implementing the same function in the most optimized assembly code from 10, especially 20 years ago.

What you're claiming is inherently not possible, since "the most optimized assembly code" is pretty much by definition the best performance you will be able to achieve.

No compiler can create faster code than a clever assembly programmer. Reason: humans have insight. Read Michael Abrash's article on why there ain't no such thing as the fastest code to see why.

Re:Laungauges

[Anonymous Coward]

So you're saying slow code runs faster on a fast machine, than fast code on a slow machine?

You're not really going out on a limb, there.

Re:Laungauges

[angel'o'sphere]

The parent did not talk about CPU but about compilers (* facepalm *)

Re:Laungauges

[Lotus456]

Not that I doubt you, but I'm curious to put this to the test. Can you suggest some sample code and an old C compiler to use?

Re:Laungauges

[JoeMerchant]

So you're saying slow code runs faster on a fast machine, than fast code on a slow machine?

You're not really going out on a limb, there.

Exactly... from the exposure I've had, it also seems that the "fastest computers in the world" are often used to run really poorly written code. Sure, you could take the time to optimize the code, but when you've got access to Petaflops - why bother?

This probably overlooks embedded development

[El Cubano]

But RedMonk's methodology involves studying the prevalence of each language on both Stack Overflow and GitHub, a correlation which "we believe to be predictive of future use, hence their value.

I know smartphones are all the rage, but there are tonnes of old school embedded devices out there and tonnes more still being developed. By old school I mean run on some embedded-type CPU or ASIC, run some custom OS, and only have a C compiler available (probably the one written by the team that bootstrapped development of the initial version of the device).

I doubt that developers working on those devices regularly post their code to GitHub and fairly positive that not many of them would post to StackOverflow asking how to make a flubord close with a genie effect on Ubuntu using clang when there is a PS/2 mouse connected.

A methodology that relies on GH and SO posts is likely to be strongly biased toward new web-based and open source development.

Re:This probably overlooks embedded development

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

A methodology that relies on GH and SO posts is likely to be strongly biased toward new web-based and open source development.

Certainly. It's hard to believe that just looking at embedded development alone, C isn't some number of orders of magnitude larger than JS by almost any useful metric I can think of: number of different projects, number of project-users, number of lines of code written, number of lines of code executed, number of different architectures/platforms supported by the language, number of developer-hours, etc.

To put this in some kind of perspective, 50,000 lines is quite large for the front end of a modern web app, but 50,000,000 lines is quite small for all the firmware in a modern car.

Re:This probably overlooks embedded development

[phantomfive]

A methodology that relies on GH and SO posts is likely to be strongly biased toward new web-based and open source development.

Indeed. Back when langpop.com was still around, they collected data from as many different places as possible. Google search, the equivalent of Github at the time, book sales, job search sites, etc. The different sources had drastically different results, enough to say that selecting from any one of them (especially Github) is not representative.

Re:This probably overlooks embedded development

[angel'o'sphere]

C isn't some number of orders of magnitude larger than JS by almost any useful metric I can think of: number of different projects, number of project-users, number of lines of code written, number of lines of code executed, number of different architectures/platforms supported by the language, number of developer-hours, etc.
Most definitely not.

The amount of C programmers on the world is what? A million perhaps? I doubt it actually, probably less than half a million.

Basically every other mainstream language has more developers using it.

You are mixing up sold/build devices that contain software/firmware written in C with the amount of people producing it and with the amount of LOCs needed to produce them.

Just because we have probably a billion devices running on linux on the world, considering Android, probably we can go up to 2 billion? Perhaps if we consider some devices have more than one linux running embedded computer, perhaps we simply say: 10 billion linux based devices in operation right now?

Anyway: regardless how many embedded devices run something based on C, worst case a single programmer could have written it. The amount of devices running code compiled from "programming language X" is completely irrelevant in relation how many programmers produce it, or how many LOCs are behind it.

Re:This probably overlooks embedded development

[Dog-Cow]

but 50,000,000 lines is quite small for all the firmware in a modern car.

You have got to be joking. The entire Linux kernel, including all the device drivers, is under 17,000,000. The space shuttle control software was less than 500,000 lines. (source)

Re:This probably overlooks embedded development

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

I'm not joking at all. The amount of firmware inside a modern car is insane.

Re:This probably overlooks embedded development

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Well, I don't have hard data to hand, but it's obvious that you're dramatically underestimating the scale of the embedded software industry. Don't feel bad, almost everyone who's never worked in it does.

The reason I say it's obvious is that you have the common misconceptions that Linux-based systems represent the majority of embedded development and that most embedded software could be written by a single person. While Linux is certainly gaining popularity for some larger and more powerful devices today, there's a huge amount of things that don't use Linux but do run code, and some of those devices have code bases running to millions of lines and large development teams working on them.

You're probably reading this on a screen. Are you also wearing a digital watch? Did you turn off an alarm system when you got to work this morning? Is there a phone on your desk or in your pocket? Is there an air conditioning system in your office? A microwave in the kitchen? How many different components that run their own firmware do you think are inside each of those systems?

Those are just a few obvious ones you can probably see right now. Once you get into more complex systems like industrial infrastructure or cars, the numbers are much bigger still, often with many different programs running as part of the overall system.

Re:This probably overlooks embedded development

[goose-incarnated]

C isn't some number of orders of magnitude larger than JS by almost any useful metric I can think of: number of different projects, number of project-users, number of lines of code written, number of lines of code executed, number of different architectures/platforms supported by the language, number of developer-hours, etc. Most definitely not.

The amount of C programmers on the world is what? A million perhaps? I doubt it actually, probably less than half a million.

A single *country* has more than that.

Re:This probably overlooks embedded development

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't believe you. Citation needed.

Re:This probably overlooks embedded development

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Seriously?

Instagram's most influential people in the world.

[Anonymous Coward]

These rankings are all based on publicly available sources. i.e. someone's 100,000 line monstrosity of a node module that no one uses gets factored in.
 
A useful (but completely unobtainable) benchmark would be USD revenue/generated per line of code. Unicorn's don't count, only actual revenue does. And everyone is going to balk and say that doesn't treat open source projects fairly but at the end of the day someone has to put food on the coders table. My guess as to what actually pays the bills is C/C++, followed by Java. I'm guessing using this benchmark Perl and maybe even Cobol actually rank above Javascript. Yes, there is a lot of shit on npm and github, that doesn't mean anyone is actually doing anything useful with it.

Widely used != popular

[wonkey_monkey]

Is this actually measuring popularity, or just usage?

Just because something's used a lot, doesn't mean it's actually popular with the people who use it...

Re:Widely used != popular

[Anonymous Coward]

Correct, It has nothing to do with popularity, there is a lot of WEB development and there is not much choice, so people are forced into JS rubbish.

Re: Widely used != popular

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks, that is what I was thinking.

Everyone hates JavaScript. Everyone tried to improve it or use another language that transcompiles to it.

My thought is that these "popular" languages are only "popular" because they are used for teaching in a university setting. These students do not have a choice.

If you go by choice, I've seen python be #1 by a large margin. If you go by "forced to use but people dislike it" I've seen php, perl, and JavaScript take top honors.

C and C++ are a completely different problem space. If you are using c to solve trivial problems that have zero performance requirements then you are not a good engineer and are wasting your time and your employer's money.

Re: Widely used != popular

[TapeCutter]

If you are using c to solve trivial problems that have zero performance requirements then you are not a good engineer and are wasting your time and your employer's money.

Yes different, C is very "robust" because a native binary is insensitive to machine environments, no need to rely on the client's environment to change, which implies minimal install/"getting started" documentation, etc.

Coding in C is no more difficult than coding in js or any other language once you know what you're doing, it's just the extra build step in the test-debug cycle that chews up the development time.

Like every other choice we make in life there is a cost benefit equation as to what language is "best", also the tools used by the chain of coders and testers in a software house will significantly narrow your choices. For example where I am now the coders all develop for specific versions of visual studio and gcc, if someone handed me an eclipse project it would take an unreasonable amount of time (money) to reconfigure the overnight build environment/scripts.

Re: Widely used != popular

[ThosLives]

Coding in C is no more difficult than coding in js or any other language once you know what you're doing, it's just the extra build step in the test-debug cycle that chews up the development time.

It feels like I have spent more time in JS debugging weird things because I typo'd a variable or changed a method signature in one place but not the passed in objects in all usages than I have ever spent waiting on C compiles. And that's 2 years of JS and 15 of C.

This is probably because you can do other things while waiting on a compile, but debugging is kind of a blocking task.

Re: Widely used != popular

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck , am I really the only person that actually likes perl ?

Re: Widely used != popular

[angel'o'sphere]

or changed a method signature in one place but not the passed in objects in all usages
Learn to use an IDE?

Re: Widely used != popular

[ThosLives]

Pray tell, how is a JS IDE supposed to know that in the implementation for

foo( bar )

You changed the expectation of bar being a string to being an object containing a property that is a string?

I admit my original post was incorrect - in this case the function signature didn't change, but it would have if JS had types. Maybe I need to start looking more earnestly at Typescript.

Re: Widely used != popular

[Anonymous Coward]

I love C and JS, but what you are describing is an inherent problem with JS that (IMO) should be outside its use case. JS is magnificent for small things. JS is a huge language with so many syntactic options that nearly anything you do that looks like it should work will actually work (just not always as intended), and the debug isn't quite as straightforward. I get why people love it; languages that allow you to do things comfortably are great. The problem is that people (or perhaps it's only me) make mistakes, and I'd rather have my compiler/IDE shouting obscenities at my stupidity rather than finding out that things aren't working like they should.

Re: Widely used != popular

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone hates JavaScript. Everyone tried to improve it or use another language that transcompiles to it.

I don't hate JavaScript. It is my language of choice for programming for fun, or for knocking out something quick and dirty. You do need to know how to avoid the bad parts, just like every other programming language.

I'm not some kid that doesn't know anything else, either. In over two decades of professional software development experience I have written production code in C, C++, C#, Java, assembler, Forth, Lisp, Visual Basic, Perl, TCL, and Python.

JavaScript's low barrier to entry means there is a lot of crap code out there. My understanding is that the same applies to PHP (note it's absence from my list of languages that I've worked with).

If you are using c to solve trivial problems that have zero performance requirements then you are not a good engineer and are wasting your time and your employer's money.

Agreed.

Depends on what "popular" means

[jb_nizet]

I certainly write some JavaScript. But it doesn't mean I like it, or even that I chose to. I just don't have the choice. Sure, I can (and do) use TypeScript or CoffeeScript, but they all suck and I would choose any type-safe language over them if I could. JavaScript is unfortunately the only language that the browsers support. I really hope that WebAssembly becomes a real, usable thing soon, and that better type-safe languages for the browser emerge. Or even better: that existing languages, like Kotlin, start targetting it and that a saner ecosystem emerges around it. I'm sick of JavaScript, and even more of its awful ecosystem (NPM, etc.)

Re:Depends on what "popular" means

[Wrath0fb0b]

You're right that the only sane option is to use a language that 'compiles' into Javascript. TypeScript supports static typing and might fit your bill.

Hopefully DART will get off the ground soon.

Re:Depends on what "popular" means

[angel'o'sphere]

You are mixing up static and dynamic typing.

JavaScript is type safe, except for the weird casting between numbers, bools, nulls and in some cases Strings.

CoffeeScrip e.g. adresses those issues.

Re:Depends on what "popular" means

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right that the only sane option is to use a language that 'compiles' into Javascript. TypeScript supports static typing and might fit your bill.

Hopefully DART will get off the ground soon.

Dart is a Google thing. TypeScript is a Microsoft thing. Neither is ever going to be supported across all browsers except by transpiling to JavaScript.

I'd pin my hopes on either WebAssembly or static typing actually getting added to JavaScript.

Re:Depends on what "popular" means

[Wrath0fb0b]

Dart is a Google thing. TypeScript is a Microsoft thing. Neither is ever going to be supported across all browsers except by transpiling to JavaScript.

I'd pin my hopes on either WebAssembly or static typing actually getting added to JavaScript.

But that's point! If it compiles into bog-standard JS then there's no actual "support" to be added anywhere.

Both TS and DART compile into JS that is compatible with the big 4 browser JS engines.

WELL THAT SETTLES IT! I'M SWITCHING!

[Anonymous Coward]

Gotta be with the flow, not 'gainst! I feel the power already! Must be in the groove! Look out! I'm coming out!

Re:This overlooks the intent

[Bite The Pillow]

"No claims are made here that these rankings are representative of general usage more broadly. They are nothing more or less than an examination of the correlation between two populations we believe to be predictive of future use, hence their value."

There's a whole pile of disclaimers at the bottom of their list, this being one. So that's already addressed.

Dunce cap, corner, now.

[Anonymous Coward]

How is this even on Slashdot? The level of stupidity to make a list like that and share it with programmers takes balls... or sheer stupidity. Never attribute to bravery what can be explained by sheer stupidity.

If that were true...

[QuietLagoon]

...a correlation which "we believe to be predictive of future use, hence their value."...

If that is valid, I'm sure Redmonk has the historical data that supports the assertion.. Why not publish it?

.

e to be predictive of future use, hence their valu

[Anonymous Coward]

Most popular ... JavaScript ... PHP

Isn't there some principle that says that the worst-designed languages are destined to become the most popular?

A study which tried to avoid bias...

[Anonymous Coward]

...by looking at multiple sources didn't yield the result we wanted to see, so we've come up with a lame excuse to limit our study to only two sources.
And it'll get us on /.'s front page!

JavaScript is used as a programming language

[Anonymous Coward]

Ideally, JavaScript would be limited in use to scripting on a niche platform. Unfortunately, it is used as a programming language on the web browser client.... I hate using JavaScript as a programming language.

Re:JavaScript is used as a programming language

[Tablizer]

Unfortunately, it is used as a programming language on the web browser client

Agreed. JS is like the QWERTY keyboard standard, we use it because everybody else uses it: not because we like it or because it's good.

I still believe IEEE more

[godrik]

Clearly, IEEE has more experience and is more believable. (And yes, I am an IEEE member, but that does not really biais me.) The methodogy used by IEEE spectrum is public [1]. And it also takes stack overflow and git hub as indices. Though that is not the ONLY thing it uses.

There is a saying in data mining: I'd rather have more data than a better algorithm.

[1] http://spectrum.ieee.org/ns/IE...

Re:I still believe IEEE more

[Puff_Of_Hot_Air]

Thanks for that link; it's pretty clear that the ieee study is far more encompassing, perhaps close to the truth! I don't really like programming in C (although it's been many years since I've done embedded) or JavaScript (mostly because I hate UI work, oh and JS), but my languages of choice are still high enough in that list. I just wish every recruiter wasn't looking for "full stack" developers. Swift is fun to work with, maybe I should reinvent myself as an apple specialist.

Re:I still believe IEEE more

[Anonymous Coward]

Their results are nonsensical: R, Python, and PHP are more popular than JavaScript!? The only way this is possible is if they are excluding libraries/frameworks (React, Angular, etc).

JavaScript is the biggest thing out there, regardless of what people think of it.

lol css

[Anonymous Coward]

lol CSS...
Still thousand of sources and sites and analysis tools etc are still unable to distinct C headers from C++ headers (github is the biggest example).. Those classification are fare from be relevant.

Security VS user friendliness

[Archfeld]

Regardless of the 'distinction' between scripting and programming languages, the continued use of Java and Flash presentation just points out how low on the scale of things security falls.
Granted I am a hardware guy and not a programmer I think security should rate nearly as high as general user friendliness.

Re:Security VS user friendliness

[Anonymous Coward]

the continued use of Java and Flash presentation just points out how low on the scale of things security falls.

Erm, I hope you realize that Java is more than a browser plugin, right?
Yes, Java applets are highly insecure, an most people stopped using them over a decade ago.
But there is nothing inherently insecure with Java running on a full JVM on a backend server.
You can (and should) run it as a restricted user, just like you would your C-code.
Even then it will typically be more secure than C because it does a lot of compile time checks and safe memory management.

And just so you know, it hasn't been slow in a long while either. It gets C++ level performance, but will typically use 2-4 times more memory.
But that's usually not an issue in Java's main use case : enterprise server backend software.

yes, but

[Anonymous Coward]

JavaScript is not a language. Ugh.

Popularity isn't the most important criterion.

[Anonymous Coward]

Popularity isn't the most important criterion for a programming language. Utility is. If deploying to browsers and in an area where you can find JavaScript programmers easily, use JavaScript. If writing kernel modules, use C.

Actually

[Anonymous Coward]

It's pretty lame comparing slow-as-mud + heavyweight scripting languages - even worse, ones that are remotely interpreted at the client, rather than actually run at the server -- with serious programming languages (and serious programmers.)

I use and like Python just fine, and I've used Perl extensively (which is not to say I like it, but...) but putting them in the same general category as C, C++, assembly, etc.? Hardly.

Methinks they need a "scripting / interpreter methods" category, and a "real executable program methods" category. And yeah, CSS, lol.

I guess they need a markup language category too, if they're even going to consider CSS and so on.

I mean, hell, if you're going to go that far afield, you might as well count Spanish and English, too. Silly bastards. :)

Re: Actually

[Anonymous Coward]

Saying people who use JavaScript aren't serious about programming is like saying people who speak Spanish arent serious about communicating.

Go crawl back in your hole. Maybe in a test some languages are faster than others at executing a for loop, but in most real world cases of 'slow software' it is not the language used so much as architecture decisions that make things slow. If you were serious about programming, you would know this!

Besides, the only people I know who are more serious than anyone about programming like to code in brainfuck.

Re: Actually

[solidraven]

You didn't quite get the point I think. C is used for anything in industry, you'll be having a hard time finding a serious embedded programmer using JS for example. Inherently C allows cost effective implementation where JS doesn't stand a chance. But most of this type of use cases will never show up on github. As pointed out by others the dialects for PLCs and LabVIEW would rank pretty high if this was a true representation as well. VHDL and Verilog would also rank readonably high, but these are all use cases which are difficult to monitor. So yeah it is funny working in industry if you see these lists knowing they're heavily skewed towards hobbyists. IEEE did a fairly decent attempt though.

The hammer or the screwdriver?

[swillden]

Programming languages are all general-purpose in some important senses, since they're all Turing Complete, but in practice they tend to have rather well-defined contexts and purposes. In a lot of ways I think asking "Which is the most popular programming language?" is a lot like asking "Which is the most popular hand tool?". The question doesn't make a lot of sense without some context.

Re:The hammer or the screwdriver?

[phantomfive]

"Which is the most popular hand tool?".

I'll be honest, I really like the hammer. What do you think? I have to admit I have an emotional attachment to wirestrippers that came after I could finally afford them, after spending years trying to (painfully) strip wires with a knife as I was growing up........

Re:The hammer or the screwdriver?

[jimbolauski]

Clearly the hammer is, you can hammer in screws and remove them with the claw. For the life of me I don't know why the screw driver is not obsolete, it's probably all those hipsters that unnecessary use a screw driver to feel cool.

YAUPLR

[prefec2]

Yet another useless programming language ranking. First they do not define what most popular means. The text suggests it means the most used language. In embedded systems it is C and C++. As embedded systems are a super widespread typenof system a lot of programmers are required. Hence it is very popular there. In contrast JS is only relevant for UI and lately small nodejs services. Most stuff in the internet runs different engines. Counting projects on github only shows the number of free or at least fancy projects , but no embedded company or other larger SW company is storing their intellectual property in the US and with an external service.

Re:YAUPLR

[Anonymous Coward]

Hilariously the node.js core and a large swath of its modules are C/C++ based, the VMs that both java and javascript run (seperate VMs but still) are also written in flavors of C/C++. I like Javascript just as much as the next guy but there is a lot of non javascript code running in systems everyone uses everyday, and most of that code is C ish...

And crayons are the most popular painting tiool.

[rrohbeck]

I wonder why.

misleading headline

[brasselv]

it's a case of misleading headlines (yeah, shocking)

as others have pointed out, the authors don't make any claim that their list represents the 'most popular languages', just that those languages enjoy particularly high visibility on two specific platforms - github and stack overflow.

you have a virtually infinite number of ways to count "popularity", some more useful than others, but each of them inevitably somewhat arbitrary.
last time I checked, oracle claimed java to be the world's most popular language, and by the way they measure it, they must be right.
heck, you could instead count each web pageview with one line of js as instance of 'program execution', count the big number and have a different winner. don't take it too seriously.

Re:misleading headline

[Anonymous Coward]

github and stack overflow: and there's the problem. Well supported propreitary languages like C# will likely be underrepresented. Speaking from my experience as a C# dev I have about a 50/50 hit rate between MSDN and stack overflow answering my questions (not counting other sources just their relative hit rate). So questions posted/points awarded on Stack Overflow are correspondingly less than I'd expect from some lesser supported (or at less less clearly "authoritive" supported) languages.

Re:misleading headline

[JoeMerchant]

Popularity on Stack Overflow indicates people having problems using the language not already addressed in other forums - older languages like C will suffer here.

Popularity on GitHub indicates people wanting to share their code, usually in open-source form... not the best indicator of what people who work for a paycheck are using.

Where do "languages" like LabView and PLC fit into this scheme? I mean, if they're tracking TypeScript...

Re:misleading headline

[Aighearach]

The headline for the same data could read, "JS is the hardest programming language" lol

Just because people on stack overflow need help, doesn't automatically mean it is popular; or that the people whose questions are being counted as popularity even like it.

Github is perhaps a better data source, but still problematic. I know in my case, most of code that goes to github is in different languages than most of my code overall. Very little of my C goes there, for example.

Re:misleading headline

[mwvdlee]

You'r going to find very little COBOL code on GitHub, despite it still being commonly used in large businesses.
I also think GitHub measurement may be more indicative of the ecosystem of a language; it's common in Javascript to have use many small single-purpose plugins (and plugins for plugins) rather than all-encompasing libraries, which means there'll be many more projects for Javascript than a language where the ecosystem tends towards libraries.

Re:misleading headline

[david_thornley]

In its early years Stack Overflow was heavily biased towards C# and .NET, with the really big reputation scores coming from those subjects.

suspect assumptions and conclusions

[bloodhawk]

There is a mass of C code that will never be published in Github or Stack Overflow. billions of devices, propriety software and systems. I am sure the percentage wise C is on the decrease but using Github or Stack Overflow to measure that is seriously flawed.

Re:suspect assumptions and conclusions

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to mention the fact that SO is a place you go to get help. When you're PHP or JS and can't fucking concatenate a string in a sensible manner, people need a lot of help. That doesn't mean it's popular; just that people need lots of help to code it.

Re:suspect assumptions and conclusions

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah and could also be the languages are popular for a reason too. Ex: people want to make a website so "know" they need to learn javascript or want to be the 10k'th person to make an iOS fart app etc. People sometimes play around with programming with no real ability.real drive to make something "real". How many secretaries have dabbled in VBA to try to make a form or automated mailing and then asked for help? How many 10 year olds make a hello world in js and then give up? Few people are going to go to the effort of say installing PHP or C# to tinker. That PHP ranks so high is probably as you said it is painful to get right so lots of questions get asked and there still is a lot of stuff out there that needs to be maintained.

VS say C where it takes skill to not screw up but the concepts are pretty basic and a book will get you by. Generally speaking, when something doesn't work it is because you screwed up and you can't see where you forgot to free something or whatever which a search won't help. Perl you can bank your head forever and never get which magic combo of $#~ willl give yo what you want (at least that was my experience). So you'll keep googling how the hell do a dereference this pointer?

Re:suspect assumptions and conclusions

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to mention the fact that SO is a place you go to get help. When you're PHP or JS and can't fucking concatenate a string in a sensible manner, people need a lot of help. That doesn't mean it's popular; just that people need lots of help to code it.

I don't care for JavaScript's use of '+' as a string concatenation operator, because unlike addition, concatenation is not commutative. It is also odd that it if only one argument is a string, it converts the other argument to a string.

However, Java, C#, and C++ also use '+' for string concatenation. As for C, how is leftString + rightString less "sensible" than strcat(left_string, right_string)?

Re:suspect assumptions and conclusions

[doom]

Perl you can bank your head forever and never get which magic combo of $#~ willl give yo what you want (at least that was my experience).

Bank your head, with perl! That sound's like a good slogan. It has the virtue of sounding-nice without meaning anything.

I see in this listing perl clocks in at #13 (#12, once you scratch out CSS), which isn't bad going for a language that's been "dead" for over a decade.

Perl is however, #1 in languages people are willing to admit that they're too stupid to use correctly.

Sorry Noobs

[Anonymous Coward]

Programmers know the history of the industry. Script-kiddies, in their blinding ignorance, think they are inventing everything because they don't know it already exits and in fact existed over a decade ago.

Sad state of affairs

[Camel Pilot]

That the ugliest language is the most popular due to an odd set of circumstances.

Re:Sad state of affairs

[gweihir]

I do not think the circumstances are odd. Unless you consider it odd that capitalism favors the least competent (and hence cheapest) group of developers for most work. As soon as we have liability for code that is not up to professional standards, things are going to change. Of course, we will need to have a number of larger catastrophes to get there first. (As for FOSS: That one is simple: Open and free the source or be liable for anything bad it does....)

Stack Overflow prevalence

[mukinrestak]

Measuring the prevalence of a language in Stack Overflow questions isn't measuring which languages get used the most so much as it is measuring which languages people have the most trouble with or are the most poorly documented. If your language is the most asked about on a help site, that doesn't mean it's popular, it means it's a PITA (and POSSIBLY also popular).

Re:And crayons are the most popular painting tiool

[Anonymous Coward]

"Crayola's methodology involves studying the prevalence of each art type on both refrigerator doors and classroom windows, a correlation which "we believe to be predictive of future use, hence their value."

Web-skewed

[Mr Z]

Anyone can put up a web page, and Javascript and PHP have a large footprint there. (I guess Java, on the enterprise server side?) It's not hard to imagine there's lots of folks that have to deal with these languages as part of their larger duties, but aren't really trained as programmers in any traditional sense. That could fuel a bunch of StackOverflow traffic for sure...

Whichever ranking you look at will be skewed by the methodology. It feels like web-oriented languages are overemphasized in this cut.

Of course, my own worldview is skewed, too. I deal more with low-level hardware, OS interactions, etc. You won't find a lick of Javascript or PHP anywhere near any of the stuff I work on daily. Lots of C, C++, some Go and Python.

Not all developers are the same

[gweihir]

For the semi-competent, you have Java. For those that do not manage that level, you have JavaScript. For those that actually understand what they are doing, you have a large faction that prefers C and the rest is all over the place.

Just remember that we have far too many "developers" and most of them are bad at it. This thing is a Pyramid with the largest and least competent group being at the bottom with JavaScript.

Re:Not all developers are the same

[angel'o'sphere]

JavaScript is actually a much more challenging language than Java or C. (And a much more powerful one)

You have your order of "competence" reversed.

Re:Not all developers are the same

[unimacs]

Anyone that knows what they are doing and are creating a complex web application will be writing a lot of javascript and maybe some java or C# on the server side.

The competent will choose a language, not just based on personal preference or their skill level, but on what makes sense to use for the task at hand. At this point in my career, it's the project that gets me excited and not working with any particular language. I can be equally happy coding in C, Go, Java, Python, or even javascript. I'm not much of a Windows guy but I ended up thoroughly enjoying myself writing a powershell script about a year ago.

Re:Not all developers are the same

[MillionthMonkey]

I think JavaScript is actually harder language if you're coming from a Java background (or any other object-oriented language). JavaScript is a protoype-based language like Scheme, and it would have been a better language if Netscape hadn't pressed for it to "look like Java", which it isn't.

Re:Not all developers are the same

[Anonymous Coward]

This can only be written by someone with limited experience. You should broaden your horizons a.s.a.p

Re:Not all developers are the same

[Shortguy881]

Just because the language is "challenging" (ie impossible to debug, read, or view a dependency tree) does not make it good. You might as well program C in notepad and call it challenging.

And what the F*** are you smoking that you think JavaScript is more powerful than pretty much any other modern programming language?

Re:Not all developers are the same

[gweihir]

Hahahahahaha, funny! Obviously you have no experience programming anything real in C.

Re:Not all developers are the same

[gweihir]

Aaand fail. Nobody that knows what they are doing will ever host a web-application on Windows (and hence will not use any C#). Also, anybody that knows what they are doing will write as little as possible active client-side content.

Re:Not all developers are the same

[unimacs]

Like I said, at this point in my career I'm more excited by interesting projects than by working with particular tools, or fighting platform wars for that matter. Hosting a web application on Windows would rarely be my choice all things being equal. But all things are almost never equal. If one can't acknowledge that given a organization's current infrastructure, budget, expertise, time constraints, etc that sometimes Windows is at least a reasonable choice, if not the better one for that situation, then it's not an issue of competence. It's an issue of narrow-mindedness.

Further, there is often good reason to push functionality to the client. For example, the web apps I often work on need to be able to deal with intermittent connectivity and sometimes high latency. For a web application that does almost nothing but display information, server side functionality might be adequate, but that's not the world we're in anymore.

Re:Not all developers are the same

[Anonymous Coward]

I think JavaScript is actually harder language if you're coming from a Java background (or any other object-oriented language). JavaScript is a protoype-based language like Scheme, and it would have been a better language if Netscape hadn't pressed for it to "look like Java", which it isn't.

Ironically, you are proving his point. JS is a prototype-chaining language, so called because objects are built up of prototypes containing function pointers and parent prototypes which are the parent type's prototype object. Scheme is a functional language which had something called "prototype based programming" built onto its side. Basically, its OO-inheritance in a functional language. Those two uses of the word "prototype" are in different contexts and mean different things. The fact that you conflated the two while trying to defend JS is the funniest thing I read all day...thanks for the lulz...

Re:Not all developers are the same

[MillionthMonkey]

The fact that you conflated the two while trying to defend JS is the funniest thing I read all day...thanks for the lulz...

I wasn't defending JavaScript (asshole!). Douglas Crockford described JavaScript as having a similar design to Scheme but having a pseudoclassical object oriented syntax forced onto it. FWIW JavaScript is a functional language also, but a half-assed one that discourages functional programming.

Re:Not all developers are the same

[angel'o'sphere]

And what the F*** are you smoking that you think JavaScript is more powerful than pretty much any other modern programming language?
I'm studying languages. You obviously don't.

(ie impossible to debug, read, or view a dependency tree)
That is nonsense. You debug it like any other language. Set breakpoints, inspect call tree and/or variables ... you must be living behind the moon?

Re:Not all developers are the same

[angel'o'sphere]

You mean me?

I programmed about 700kLOC C++. My own STL clone (subset obviously) because the version from HP at that time did not compile under windows. And as it was brand new no compiler vendor included something like it.

In C I only did some robotics and Sun OpenView programming to put a C GUI on a Prolog Expert System (K&R C ... btw, Sun compiler, that was 1988 shudder)

Luckily I jumped straight from K&R to C++.

Re:Not all developers are the same

[Shortguy881]

So go ahead and give me your argument for why JavaScript is more power than most modern languages. I would like to learn something new today.

Re:Not all developers are the same

[angel'o'sphere]

Was already mentioned in previous posts:
o class less object oriented (based on prototypes)
o mixed oo and functional language
o anonymous functions aka closures (sometimes called wrongly lambdas)
o runtime meta programming (like merging objects/classes like in multiple inheritance)
o dynamic dispatch, meta object protocol
o "build in scripting" via eval() and similar function
o very flexible runtime model that can be augmented

Unfortunately it is not running in a VM that supports "images" like SmallTalk does. OTOH, I don't program much in JavaScript ... if I switch to something new, it will likely be SmallTalk.

Red who?

[geoskd]

Python ranked #4 on RedMonk's list, while the survey found a three-way tie for fifth place between Ruby, C#, and C++,

Their methodology according to the link is to scan github and sourceforge and determine what frequency those projects use what languages. This is absolutely asinine, as it completely precludes all closed source work. Most embedded systems, drivers, and other low level work is not going to be open source, as it is work for hire. This list can best be described as the ranking of the popularity of languages for peoples pet projects, and or what languages they use when not getting paid. I will also say that given the choice between a website with only a dozen years of existence vs IEEE with almost 100 years of existence with an interest in all things electronic and computing, I will go with IEEE every time. Sorry RedMonk, its just hard to take you seriously when you are clearly some guys blog, and you're competing with an international professional organization with membership measured in the millions and decades of exceptional science and technology reporting.

Re:This overlooks the intent

[phantomfive]

They are nothing more or less than an examination of the correlation between two populations we believe to be predictive of future use

That sounds like an attempt to say "these are representative of general usage more broadly" without actually saying that.

NoScript for sure. DISABLE JAVASCRIPT

[Anonymous Coward]

unless needed, disable javascript. Don't disable C :)

Javascript libraries run alot of the web content

[Anonymous Coward]

Java, Python, PHP, JS, C++, C, C# and Ruby seem to be in most top rankings. Where each one ranks is different for most lists I Googled. I agree that CSS should not be included with such lists, but Javascript libraries run alot of the web content now just as how PHP runs most web backends. No need to not included it.

Thanks for the info

[Archfeld]

I did realize it was a combination of JVM and applets but as I stated I am no where near a competent programmer but rather a hardware tech. I took several programming classes while in college so I understand 'in theory' what one should be able to do as a programmer. I work with analysts and systems engineers to design, install and configure CPU's/routers/SAN storage devices and OS's but I would be hard pressed to do anything approaching programming. I'm competent enough to shell script and make use of CRON and such.

About matches my experience

[blindseer]

I've been looking to return to programming after years of doing firmware development, doing some IT work since, and now going back to school to update my skills. In order to see what I should focus on in school I've been looking at what languages are seen most often on job postings. In no particular order I see JavaScript, SQL, PHP, Python, and Perl at the top of my list. There's some demand for C++, C#, and Ruby. I'll see some demand for things like R, Matlab, and some statistical tools, but those seem to be jobs at the local university which should not be a surprise.

What I've figured out is that there is demand for people that can program web based applications. This means JavaScript and its various libraries, PHP, Python, and perhaps some Java and C++. If we are stretching the programming languages a bit then we get into things like HTML, XML, CSS, and other markup languages. Looking at the programming course I have this fall I see it will be taught using Java, Ruby, or Scala. I don't recall even seeing Scala until today so this could be interesting.

Re:About matches my experience

[Shortguy881]

Just a tip, if you want to do front end web development, pick up JavaScript (along with HTML, CSS). If you want to do anything else (web services, desktop applications, mobile applications, data science, etc), look at a more robust language.

The Meaning of Popularity

[Bing Tsher E]

I would base a popularity figure on usage, not on the number of coders.

And since the Javascript Interpreters are probably written in C, it's impossible for Javascript to be the most popular. Any Javascript in existence runs on top of C, so C trumps it.

Now, when somebody writes a javascript interpreter that runs in javascript, we will see. And it will need to be turtles all the way down, obviously.

even worse

[Anonymous Coward]

as far as I know the data source is github. The choice of what language to use for open source stuff versus stuff that will get you paid might be vastly different. My work, largish b2b dev shop probably C++, Java, and C# in that order. Last place was C and perl of all things, before that python. Anyways, the mix is vastly different I'd expect. Ex: many more people will play with python or ruby in their spare time vs have an employer willing to base their product on it.

It doesn't mean the languages aren't capable just employers haven't bought in yet.

Should have been done long ago

[Baldrson]

It would have happened over a decade earlier if the DotCon bubble burst hadn't replaced most of the old guard in Silicon Valley with H-1b's from India trained in Java.

Should online applications have used X11?

[tepples]

It's pretty lame comparing slow-as-mud + heavyweight scripting languages - even worse, ones that are remotely interpreted at the client, rather than actually run at the server -- with serious programming languages (and serious programmers.)

If you prefer that apps be "actually run at the server" and made in "serious programming languages", how would such apps display their results to the user? Would it be better if we were accessing applications through X11 protocol instead of through HTTP, HTML, CSS, and JavaScript? Or what protocol to access remote applications (with smaller view update granularity than the full page) would you prefer instead?

Very sensitive to machine environments

[tepples]

a native binary is insensitive to machine environments

Good luck running a binary made for a Mac on any machine environment other than a Mac.

(Legally.)

Re:Very sensitive to machine environments

[Anonymous Coward]

Good luck running a binary made for a Mac on any machine environment other than a Mac.

Who needs luck?

Re:Very sensitive to machine environments

[tepples]

I had never heard of Darling, a Darwin program loader for Linux. That's a start. I may check every few months to see if there's progress toward running GUI applications.

So let me amend my claim: Good luck running a native iOS binary off an iPhone or iPad. Even the device simulator in Xcode is said to emulate a fictional Intel-based iOS device so that it can use an x86 VMM as opposed to a true emulator.

Re:Very sensitive to machine environments

[Anonymous Coward]

I may check every few months

I don't care.

So let me amend my claim

Lame.

Re:Very sensitive to machine environments

[tepples]

I conceded the original question, namely "can Mac binaries run outside a Mac?", and raised two new questions, namely "can Mac GUI binaries run outside a Mac?" and "can iOS binaries run outside an iOS device?". You called this "moving the goalposts". Under what conditions is it acceptable to ask a second question, provided it is not represented as the original question?

Comments indicate the IEEE is not competent.

[Futurepower(R)]

This is the IEEE article: The 2016 Top Programming Languages. The link in the parent comment only shows the methods. The methods page does not have a link to the main article.

Here are some comments copied from the Top Programming Languages interactive web page that seem to indicate that the IEEE is not competent:

"Antonio Campos - 5 days ago -- middle of 2016 and people still thinking HTML is a programming language"

"RM1948 - 5 days ago -- Arduino is not a language but a development environment. It should be added into C++. The aruduino.cc site actually says they are C++."

"Tom - 5 days ago -- I don't think it makes sense to lump every assembly language into one - especially since you are making the distinction between C and 'Arduino C' for some reason."

COBOL

[MouseTheLuckyDog]

Let us remember that from 1960 to about 2001, the language would have been COBOL not Javascript. None then or now believe it was all that great of a language. For javascript all I can say it is that it is a great write once, take forever to figure out what it is doing language. I'm not to thrilled with prototypes.

The one thing I find really surprising is that C ranks over C++. Sure there are some nasty things that can be done in C++, but I recently looked at some C code. The majority of it was replicating basic data structures and algorithms that could be fond in the STL. Very likely the C++ version would have been tighter or cleaner too.

As a C programmer

[thinkwaitfast]

I couldn't care less. I've never cared. I seriously doubt that I'll ever care.

Re:As a C programmer

[DidgetMaster]

Agreed. Actually, I hope that more people will code using slow and bloated interpretive languages. That makes my fast code written in C (and C++) look even faster in comparison.

Re:As a C programmer

[ComSon0]

I couldn't care less. I've never cared. I seriously doubt that I'll ever care.

Amen brother.

Re:As a C programmer

[david_thornley]

Lots of applications run just fine with slow and bloated interpretive languages, since the limiting factor is user input. There's a lot of applications that are limited primarily by the user, and efficiency past a certain point isn't all that useful.

Choose with your heart, not with numbers

[bothorsen]

What is the relevance of these scores? Should it help people somehow, for example that you should choose to work with a language that's popular?

There are tons of great jobs out there for any great developer, be that Java, C++, C, Javascript or a bunch of others. Choose the language you love to develop with and work on getting better on that instead. If you're a great developer, you will be able to find a very good job and good things will happen to you.

That said, the methodology of this score is hilariously stupid. For example, I doubt the gaming industry - which is almost pure C++ - will make an effort to save stuff on github.

JavaScript isnt the most popular language.

[Anonymous Coward]

Postscript is!

This is what happens when someone writes an

[Anonymous Coward]

article that they know absolutely nothing about. Javascript is a scripting language, not a programming language. Different category altogether.
You would not write an application in Javascript. This article does not make sense and we are all dumber for reading it.

Re:Instagram's most influential people in the worl

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't put COBOL over JavaScript. Web development also puts food on the table and there is a lot of commercial sites with JavaScript on them out there.

Engineering by popularity?

[Mybrid]

Hi! Since when did an engineer pick the right tool for the job by popularity? Totally irrelevant survey only good for click-bait.

Poor methodology

[shaitand]

Trend languages tend to be more popular on trend public hosting platforms like github and more mature languages already have answers on stackoverflow and the like and therefore would have fewer questions asked. C would likely rank even lower without so many people asking questions and getting pointed at existing solutions.

The flaw in this methodology is that it assumes the fly-by-night trend languages of today will survive the test of time simply because their adoption rate is high today. The reality is most of them will vanish into obscurity with time as they always have.

Considering....

[MercTech]

Considering that Javascript is a scripting language and not a programming language you can't say it is the most popular programming language.
    Anyway, I'm an old fart and still don't think C with its pseudo compiler that requires a run time module to function a real programming language either.
    With the huge hard drives and cheap memory today; few pay attention to writing tight code and compiling to machine code that takes up minimal space.

Javascript is a programming language.....

[Anonymous Coward]

Which computer programs have you used since last Christmas and how often? How many of these were written in C or C++? How many computer programs have been written in JavaScript?

Stack Overflow

[Anonymous Coward]

Most common on stack overflow could imply there are many users having issues with the language...
For example, JS might be at the top because of a steep learning curve. Not saying it is, just that it could be.