Jump to content

Talk:Eiffel (programming language)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by NE Ent (talk | contribs) at 22:04, 25 February 2023 (OneClickArchiver archived Bold and italic font conventions to Talk:Eiffel (programming language)/Archive 1). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconComputing Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconComputer science Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

/Expanded draft

Archives

/Archive 1

Font conventions (again)

Another possible approach to handlign syntax conventions has become available. Wikipedia now supports GeSHi[1], which provides automated syntax highlighting by use of <syntaxhighlight> tags. This would eliminate the need to include formatting markup in the text of the page itself (which can be a little cumbersome). A downside is that the current support for syntax highlighting of Eiffel (yes, it has Eiffel support already) doesn't perfectly conform to the current syntax presentation guidelines:

For example we would get the following 

   class 
       HELLO_WORLD
   create
       make
   feature
       make
         do
            io.put_string ("Hello, world!")
            io.put_new_line
         end
   end

However, if we were to convert the page to using GeSHi <syntaxhighlight> tags then we could move the convention issues over to fixing Eiffel syntax highlighting in GeSHi (there are, apparently, files for each language which can be changed) and not have to mess with markup on this page anymore -- it would all propogate automatically. Thoughts? -- Leland McInnes 20:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like this proposal. GeSHi seems to use CSS so it's reasonable to think users could pick how they want to view the code. For instance, I could imagine little buttons on every source snippet that would switch between formatted and unformatted views. Regardless, with GeSHi support, I think these <syntaxhighlight> tags are likely to become the standard way to present code, so this article should probably conform for that reason. --Doradus 03:07, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is done. Certainyl it makes maintainability of code samples much easier. It also has the bonus of actually taggin code as Eiffel code specifically. Unfortunately it doesn't work fo inline code. -- Leland McInnes 06:39, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why wouldn't it work for inline code? --Doradus 21:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Because GeSHi automatically renders into blocks, so putting <syntaxhighlight> tags on inline code only results in it no longer being inline. -- Leland McInnes 02:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see the article has recovered from its brief bout of blue-font insanity. I think the way it's done now, with a "style conventions" section, is just right. --Doradus 21:54, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

there was a clear vote on how it should like, and the inventors proposal was voted for. i'd suggest you change your stylesheet so it conforms to the original, or you change it back to without stylesheet and it looks again like the original. --83.215.194.249 00:13, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would be happy if the GeSHi Eiffel stylesheet could be cleaned up to conform. It's actually reasonably close already (compare, for example, to code on the open source EiffelStudio wiki [2][3]). That, however, is in the hands of whoever maintains GeSHi for Wikipedia -- I really would not know how to make the change as an ordinary user. Ultimately this is the best solution, it just has pending stylesheet changes to be dealt with. -- Leland McInnes 02:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to be at MediaWiki:Geshi.css, so make whatever change you want. --Doradus 11:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is what I suggested to do 4 years later, although the format has an inline option class HELLO_WORLD create make feature ... if that makes sense.
I don't know if you already had noticed that. This discussion is so long that I forgot what other point I wanted to write about.

No instructions, advice, or how-to

I removed Thumperward's "how-to" marker, as I do not see where it applies. Please provide a specific example or more detailed critizism. Thanks. --Schoelle (talk) 15:42, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When appeared?

Infobox says 1986; text says "Since 1985, many suppliers have developed Eiffel programming environments". Any better sources? 192.12.12.178 (talk) 02:24, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Added a reference in the info block to the web page mentioning the history of the language. Alexander (Sasha) (talk) 09:06, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Introductory sentences are promotional, not NPOV

The introductory paragraph reads like marketing copy.. Since efficient development, reliability, and extensibility are generally considered virtues, and object-oriented programming is widely seen as a road to these qualities, all this introduction says is that Eiffel is designed to be a good object-oriented language. The way the first paragraph reads now, it seems to say, "Eiffel is designed to get object oriented languages right, which is demonstrated by its use in academia and in all of these different applications, and you even have a wide choice of tools to use!" It is only in the second paragraph that the article gets around to discussing the specific principles that distinguish Eiffel from other languages.

The introduction should describe what makes Eiffel objectively different, and anything that is said about how good it is needs to be backed up by citations to published and peer-reviewed studies that demonstrate using Eiffel leads to measurably better results than using some other specific choices that could be made. Only then are such statements NPOV. What we have here instead sounds like bandwagon marketing tactics don't cut it (ironic, since according to Tiobe Software's Programming Community Index, Eiffel is not even in the top 50 programming languages).

popularity is not a way to judge the good quality of a language. Many OO languages are very bad designed. Eiffel, was designed with a more formally rigorous approach, I don't care if the majority of programmers ignore what a precondition is, preferring languages more easy to learn for the laymen, those with no types, and a lot of traps to fall.
Eiffel has a good design because it gives no rope to programmer for hanging himself. And has features which were added just recently to those more popular OO languages, which I wont mention to avoid a religious discussion with their fans.
I hate OO languages because they distorted many concepts. For example, encapsulation, in many OO languages the objects are parametrized changing internal constants. That violate the information hiding principle.
Nevertheless, I am interested to learn about Eiffel, because contrary to many of the other OO counterparts, seems a well designed language, Because it is designed for good software engineering practices, like design by contract. It is not in the top list of popularity, but had positively influenced both other programming languages and the programming practice.
It may sound publicity to you, but it is not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2806:106E:B:EB8A:5812:FFA3:1BF4:BDDD (talk) 03:34, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there are objections which need to be worked through, I will soon rewrite the first sentence to "Eiffel is an ISO-standardized, general-purpose object-oriented programming language," move the rest of the paragraph to the end of the section into a paragraph just above the contents, and continue the first paragraph with the second paragraph. --—C. V. Hyphus\talk 04:16, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Lead reworked --Cybercobra (talk) 05:28, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Missing File Extension

Can someone who knows Eiffel add the file extension used by its components. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.209.111.39 (talk) 22:49, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Added the file extension to the language template block. Alexander (Sasha) (talk) 08:48, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eiffel (programming language). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:58, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eiffel_(programming_language)&oldid=1141603431"