"The 2016 Top Programming Languages"

[Lynn McGuire]

"The 2016 Top Programming Languages"
http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/the-2016-top-programming-languages

"C is No. 1, but big data is still the big winner"

Where is Fortran ?

Lynn

[Ian Harvey]

Is that a rhetorical question?

Number 28 otherwise, depending on your weighting.

[Richard Heathfield]

Have you checked down the back of the settee?

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

[jacobnavia]

Interesting

Nobody commented on why C++ went from the third to the fourth place.

[Öö Tiib]

What it is? How to comment it? What went from where to where?
There that statistics programming language "R" is at #5 and
wins C#, PHP and Javascript. Really? At place #11 there is "Andruino".
Isn't it hardware platform? :D It feels like some sort of bad joke.

[Lynn McGuire]

The wild thing that nobody commented on was Go at #10 spot.

Lynn

[Jerry Stuckle]

The problem here is their sampling is flawed. For instance, they don't
look at large enterprises which typically have a low turnover rate and
when they are looking for programmers, use headhunters.

As a good example, approximately 5 billion lines of COBOL are written
each year (https://cis.hfcc.edu/faq/cobol). But the list doesn't even
show COBOL.

Looking at the number of jobs, etc. is a good way to check for job
openings - but due to the difference in turnover rates (i.e. C
programmers have a much higher turnover rate than COBOL programmers) is
not a good measurement.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstu...@attglobal.net
==================

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, July 28, 2016 at 8:17:09 PM UTC-5, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>
> The problem here is their sampling is flawed. For instance, they don't
> look at large enterprises which typically have a low turnover rate and
> when they are looking for programmers, use headhunters.
>
> As a good example, approximately 5 billion lines of COBOL are written
> each year (https://cis.hfcc.edu/faq/cobol). But the list doesn't even
> show COBOL.
>
> Looking at the number of jobs, etc. is a good way to check for job
> openings - but due to the difference in turnover rates (i.e. C
> programmers have a much higher turnover rate than COBOL programmers) is
> not a good measurement.
>

How to explain the lower turnover rate for such
a dull language like COBOL? I'm not sure which
is worse Java or COBOL.


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust.
http://webEbenezer.net

Brian

[Scott Lurndal]

woodb...@gmail.com writes:
>On Thursday, July 28, 2016 at 8:17:09 PM UTC-5, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>
>> The problem here is their sampling is flawed. For instance, they don't
>> look at large enterprises which typically have a low turnover rate and
>> when they are looking for programmers, use headhunters.
>>
>> As a good example, approximately 5 billion lines of COBOL are written
>> each year (https://cis.hfcc.edu/faq/cobol). But the list doesn't even
>> show COBOL.
>>
>> Looking at the number of jobs, etc. is a good way to check for job
>> openings - but due to the difference in turnover rates (i.e. C
>> programmers have a much higher turnover rate than COBOL programmers) is
>> not a good measurement.
>>
>
>How to explain the lower turnover rate for such
>a dull language like COBOL?

Dull?

> I'm not sure which
>is worse Java or COBOL.

Who are you to judge?

Why does one language need to be "better" than any other? Use
what solves the problem most effectively - and one can solve business
problems in COBOL much more effectively (and quickly) than one can
solve them with C or C++.

[Cholo Lennon]

I don't trust in those rankings. If you consider TIOBE for example, C++
is in 3rd place and R is in the position 17th (not to mention that the
1st and 2nd places are swapped in both rankings)

Regards

--
Cholo Lennon
Bs.As.
ARG

[Daniel]

On Thursday, July 28, 2016 at 11:56:51 PM UTC-4, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> How to explain the lower turnover rate for such
> a dull language like COBOL?

Legacy software. Legacy software is software that works, if it hadn't worked,
it wouldn't have become legacy.

> I'm not sure which is worse Java or COBOL.
>

It's hard to complain about software that works.

Daniel

[Jerry Stuckle]

Solid job, good salary, great benefits, excellent working conditions.
Most of the COBOL programmers I know have been at it for 20 years or
more with the same company. And the ones who have retired have
comfortable pensions.

And they don't think it's dull at all. But who are they do judge - they
only do it 40 hours a week.

[Jerry Stuckle]

On 7/29/2016 9:35 AM, Daniel wrote:
> On Thursday, July 28, 2016 at 11:56:51 PM UTC-4, woodb...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> How to explain the lower turnover rate for such
>> a dull language like COBOL?
>
> Legacy software. Legacy software is software that works, if it hadn't worked,
> it wouldn't have become legacy.
>

I wouldn't consider 5 billion lines of new code every year to be "legacy".

I also forgot to mention - the figures I remember from IBM stats was 2
billion each year. While looking for the reference, I came across this
one, which looks to be more accurate (IBM made their estimates based on
surveys of their customer base - large, but hardly all-encompassing).

>> I'm not sure which is worse Java or COBOL.
>>
> It's hard to complain about software that works.
>
> Daniel
>

Which is another reason why it's so popular.

[David Brown]

People are willing to do /very/ dull jobs for 40 hours a week for good
salaries, a safe position, and a comfortable pension. In fact, those
are the sorts of compensations you need to provide in order to get
someone to do a job that requires skill, intelligence, education, and
responsibility - but is incredibly dull.

I have never had the "pleasure" of programming in COBOL, so I can't
judge if it really is dull or not. But your description here of COBOL
programmers does nothing to dispel the common view of COBOL's dullness.

[Jerry Stuckle]

You seem to be an expert in /very/ dull jobs - despite your lack of
experience in COBOL.

Yes, the common view of those who don't know COBOL is that it's dull.
Those who have programmed in it know better. It's no more or less dull
than C or any other programming language.

[J. Clarke]

In article <78d5c206-6717-48eb...@googlegroups.com>,
woodb...@gmail.com says...

Because professionals work in the language that does what is needed, not
the language that is "exciting". COBOL may be "dull" but it runs
immense businesses.

[David Brown]

I merely think that your description of COBOL programmers makes it sound
like the job is dull. COBOL programming is presumably still be a great
job on balance - most people do their jobs for reasons other than fun.

> Yes, the common view of those who don't know COBOL is that it's dull.
> Those who have programmed in it know better. It's no more or less dull
> than C or any other programming language.
>

Plenty of people have dull jobs programming in other languages - there's
no denying that.

But some people have /fun/ programming in C or a number of other
languages. Does anyone have fun programming in COBOL? I don't know -
you are the expert there.

[Jerry Stuckle]

What's dull about it? Just because people enjoy doing it for years for
the same company? Now narrow-minded.

>> Yes, the common view of those who don't know COBOL is that it's dull.
>> Those who have programmed in it know better. It's no more or less dull
>> than C or any other programming language.
>>
>
> Plenty of people have dull jobs programming in other languages - there's
> no denying that.
>
> But some people have /fun/ programming in C or a number of other
> languages. Does anyone have fun programming in COBOL? I don't know -
> you are the expert there.
>
>

You should learn what you're talking about before opening your mouth.
You first say you don't know anything about COBOL, then say it's a dull
job. But that seems to be good at criticizing things you know nothing
about.

[jacobnavia]

Yes but according to the figures now, C is in the first place there
also! Both measurements agree that C overtook Java and that C++ is in
the 3rd or 4th place
see:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measuring_programming_language_popularity#/media/File:Tiobeindex.png

[Cholo Lennon]

The Wikipedia image is not updated, just go to the TIOBE index website
in order to check the actual ranking: Java super-passed C several months
ago (March, 2015).

http://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/

Nowadays the difference between Java and C is on the increase on TIOBE
(19.804% delta +2 vs 12.238% delta -3.9, July, 2016)

[jacobnavia]

Le 03/08/2016 à 23:41, Cholo Lennon a écrit :

> The Wikipedia image is not updated, just go to the TIOBE index website
> in order to check the actual ranking: Java super-passed C several months
> ago (March, 2015).
>
> http://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/
>
> Nowadays the difference between Java and C is on the increase on TIOBE
> (19.804% delta +2 vs 12.238% delta -3.9, July, 2016)
>
>
> Regards
>
>

Still, C++ is after C in all ratings.

[Cholo Lennon]

I've never said the opposite ;-)