Talk:Factor (programming language)

Is this language at all notable? Stevage 15:17, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No less notable than List of vehicles in the Simpsons or a thousand other topics here. It's had far more development and practical application than the Joy language, let alone Brainfuck. 67.98.226.12 23:23, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Except that hundres of millions of people know the Simpsons, and billions of people know what a vehicle is.--Congruence (talk) 17:13, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ceran 18:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)Aside from answering the eternal question "What would Lisp look like backwards?", no, this language isn't very notable. That said, the previous commenter makes a good point in that there are articles on far less note-worthy topics. More importantly (and surprisingly), it still appears to be under active development. As of today, the author is making regular updates to his blog at http://factor-language.blogspot.com/. So who knows, maybe this boring love-child of Lisp and Forth might actually become useful.[reply]

It is a actively developed language with practical work beinng done. Shabda 06:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how you can say that it is not a notable language. You can find references and discussions (usually in very favorable lights) on popular language discussion sites such as Lambda the Ultimate and Reddit. The language is quite easy to learn and use, and has many very practical libraries which are distributed with the language itself.Gmh33 20:02, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The notability of Factor can be pretty well established by the fact that it's in the top fifty programming communities according to the Tiobe index. [1] --FOo (talk) 06:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding? That index measures marketing success, not programming language seriousness. Come on, it doesn't even mention Ocaml! If Factor appears there, it's only because its author is spending time submitting posts about it to social bookmarking sites. Apparently he does a very good job of marketing his uninteresting Forth clone. A better criteria would be to check Debian packages to see if there is anything written in factor. Not!--Congruence (talk) 17:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interpreted language?

Quote: "Factor was originally only interpreted, but it can now also be compiled. The compiler is written entirely in Factor, and it does not output standalone executables but rather merely a faster image."

So in other words....the compiler optimizes the code, which is still in Factor? Or am I missing something here? Bjelleklang - talk Bug Me 23:59, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, the compiler converts Factor into machine code (currently supporting PPC, x86, x86-64 and ARM), which is nevertheless stored in the image with non-compiled Factor code. Maybe the wording was unclear. LittleDan^talk 17:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]