This category holds web pages and sites that compare two or more programming languages, on one or more variable, via text, feature lists, tables, code samples, equations, pictures, jokes, or any other means, sensible or nonsensical. To qualify for this page, submissions must be about, and of interest to, those interested in, more than one language.
On this page, languages are arranged in three groups and levels: 1) Top group: issues spanning multiple unrelated languages. 2) Middle group: components, frameworks. 3) Bottom group: specific languages, with their own category.
More information
More information
Subcategories 9
Related categories 2
Sites 38
Compares canonical solutions to same problem as code samples in: C++, Dylan, E, Erlang, Haskell, JavaScript, Lisp (Arc, Common, Goo, Scheme), Lua, Maple, Mathematica, Oz-Mozart, NewtonScript, Perl, Python, REBOL, Ruby, Smalltalk, VBScript. [Paul Graham]
Some think Java is like C++. Usual C++ idioms do not apply to Java as it is not a C++ superset or subset; Java is a derivation with many modifications, extensions. Both language syntax are alike, but semantics and philosophy are very different. Java is nearer Ada 95 than C++, except in syntax.
Compares 4 programming languages (Ada 95, C, C++, Java) with the needs of "Steelman", original 1978 requirements document for Ada language. Big detailed table.
Five short essays compare C (and C++ by extension) to Fortran: Why C is Not a Good Numerical Language, Why C is Not a Good First Language, C's Poor Loop Constructs, C's Pointers and Optimisation, Optimisation through Directives.
References, zipped Postscript, and inlined gifs.
Also compares C#, Java, C++. By Ben Albahari.
Many comparisons between Tcl/Tk and other similar systems, most copied from comp.lang.tcl.
Yes-No table with definitions compares D, C, C++, C#, Java, on: GC, functions, arrays, OOP, performance, reliability, compatibility, conditional compiling. [Digital Mars]
Text compares differences of several main aspects.
One set of requirements, 80 implementations, coded by 74 different programmers in various languages, compared for properties: run time, memory use, source text length, comment density, program structure, reliability, effort needed.
[PDF]
Pro-Forth text explains why C is used more than Forth.
Pro-Forth question and answer text, some questions have several answers.
Multipage study compares: 4GL/5GL, 3GL (Ada 95, C, C++, COBOL, FORTRAN, Java, Smalltalk), 2GL (Assembly). Divides language (definition) from traits of products that implement and support it. Several sections, tables, appendixes.
Growing table compares D, C, C++, C#, Java, Delphi, Python, Perl, Eiffel, Sather, Smalltalk, Lisp/CLOS, Ada. Many clarifying comments below. [Wiki4D, Open Content]
Ron Garret / Erann Gat comparison, starts from 1999 Prechelt study results, adds many insights; as text, a few tables. [Intelligence]
[PDF]
Brief text on comparisons of C, C++, Java, Lisp, Ron Garret / Erann Gat study, with conforming example program Lisp source code; very useful links.
Small-scale benchmark test run on 9 languages or variants: Java 1.3.1 and 1.4.2, C via gcc 3.3.1, Python 2.3.2 and via Psyco 1.1.1, 4 from Microsoft Visual Studio .NET 2003: Visual Basic/C#/C++/J#.
Comparison with text, code samples, many reader comments. Michael Tsai weblog.
Suite of common programming problems solved in Ada, C++, Erlang, Guile, Haskell, Java, Masd, merd, NASM, Objective Caml, Perl, Pliant, Python, Ruby, Tcl.
Compares the same program in Ada, C, Forth, FORTRAN, Java, Lisp, Perl, R, Ruby. Goal: support decisions in language choice for making compute-intensive Web programs. Text, table, code samples.
Table and text compares many features of some popular object-oriented languages: C++, C#, Eiffel, Java, Perl, Python, Ruby, Smalltalk, Visual Basic.
Briefly compares major Linux programming languages: C, C++, Fortran, Java, Lisp, Perl, PHP, Python, Tcl; by Risto S. Varanka.
Many links to comparisons involving Python.
Display time as English sentence, coded in: AWK, C, ICI, Icon, JavaScript, Lite/mSQL, PHP3, Pike, Python, REBOL, Rexx, Ruby, SLang, Spanner. Tested on only Linux (all) and AmigaOS (C and Rexx versions).
Collection of self-reproducing programs: each outputs a copy of its own source code; about 60 languages.
Mini ray tracer benchmark written equivalently in C++, Java, SML, Objective Caml, Lisp, Scheme. Compares verbosity, performance; text, code samples, tables, image, graph. [Flying Frog Consultancy]
TOM attempts to address flaws in these languages: C++, Cecil, Common Lisp, Eiffel, Java, Objective-C, Smalltalk.
Common algorithms and other sample code in the languages: Bash and Bourne shells, C/C++, Java, MATLAB/Octave, Perl, Python, Ruby, Scheme.
Text compares Python and Eiffel, via Tim Peters' Zen rules.
Compares many languages in brief text, describes each by the problem it fixes. [Paul Graham]
Author explains what he considers wrong about Perl, presents Python as an alternative. Descriptions, code samples, links.
Brian Kernighan's comparison of Pascal and C
Brief text compares Assembly to C; lower to higher level language. ScienceProg.
Text treats general aspects of language choices, then compares hatred of Perl, Python, Ruby, PHP, Java, C, C++, JavaScript, XSLT, SQL. With many forum comments. [ONLamp.com]
(May 12, 2003)
Programming guru, Robert Martin, on languages of the coming decade. [ITworld.com]
(March 01, 2001)
Compares 4 languages: C, C++, C#, Java. Shows family genealogy. [Dr. Dobb's Journal]
(September 04, 2000)
Interview with Dennis Ritchie, Bjarne Stroustrup, James Gosling.
(July 01, 2000)
By Lutz Prechelt. Neutral, quantitative analysis of 7 languages in title, for 7 variables, via 80 implementations of the same requirement set. PDF format. [IEEE Computer]
[PDF] (March 14, 2000)
Many links to comparisons involving Python.
Mini ray tracer benchmark written equivalently in C++, Java, SML, Objective Caml, Lisp, Scheme. Compares verbosity, performance; text, code samples, tables, image, graph. [Flying Frog Consultancy]
Small-scale benchmark test run on 9 languages or variants: Java 1.3.1 and 1.4.2, C via gcc 3.3.1, Python 2.3.2 and via Psyco 1.1.1, 4 from Microsoft Visual Studio .NET 2003: Visual Basic/C#/C++/J#.
One set of requirements, 80 implementations, coded by 74 different programmers in various languages, compared for properties: run time, memory use, source text length, comment density, program structure, reliability, effort needed.
[PDF]
Yes-No table with definitions compares D, C, C++, C#, Java, on: GC, functions, arrays, OOP, performance, reliability, compatibility, conditional compiling. [Digital Mars]
References, zipped Postscript, and inlined gifs.
Pro-Forth question and answer text, some questions have several answers.
Pro-Forth text explains why C is used more than Forth.
Brief text compares Assembly to C; lower to higher level language. ScienceProg.
Briefly compares major Linux programming languages: C, C++, Fortran, Java, Lisp, Perl, PHP, Python, Tcl; by Risto S. Varanka.
Ron Garret / Erann Gat comparison, starts from 1999 Prechelt study results, adds many insights; as text, a few tables. [Intelligence]
[PDF]
Brief text on comparisons of C, C++, Java, Lisp, Ron Garret / Erann Gat study, with conforming example program Lisp source code; very useful links.
Text compares Python and Eiffel, via Tim Peters' Zen rules.
Text compares differences of several main aspects.
Comparison with text, code samples, many reader comments. Michael Tsai weblog.
Compares canonical solutions to same problem as code samples in: C++, Dylan, E, Erlang, Haskell, JavaScript, Lisp (Arc, Common, Goo, Scheme), Lua, Maple, Mathematica, Oz-Mozart, NewtonScript, Perl, Python, REBOL, Ruby, Smalltalk, VBScript. [Paul Graham]
Five short essays compare C (and C++ by extension) to Fortran: Why C is Not a Good Numerical Language, Why C is Not a Good First Language, C's Poor Loop Constructs, C's Pointers and Optimisation, Optimisation through Directives.
Compares many languages in brief text, describes each by the problem it fixes. [Paul Graham]
Common algorithms and other sample code in the languages: Bash and Bourne shells, C/C++, Java, MATLAB/Octave, Perl, Python, Ruby, Scheme.
Table and text compares many features of some popular object-oriented languages: C++, C#, Eiffel, Java, Perl, Python, Ruby, Smalltalk, Visual Basic.
Compares the same program in Ada, C, Forth, FORTRAN, Java, Lisp, Perl, R, Ruby. Goal: support decisions in language choice for making compute-intensive Web programs. Text, table, code samples.
Display time as English sentence, coded in: AWK, C, ICI, Icon, JavaScript, Lite/mSQL, PHP3, Pike, Python, REBOL, Rexx, Ruby, SLang, Spanner. Tested on only Linux (all) and AmigaOS (C and Rexx versions).
Compares 4 programming languages (Ada 95, C, C++, Java) with the needs of "Steelman", original 1978 requirements document for Ada language. Big detailed table.
Some think Java is like C++. Usual C++ idioms do not apply to Java as it is not a C++ superset or subset; Java is a derivation with many modifications, extensions. Both language syntax are alike, but semantics and philosophy are very different. Java is nearer Ada 95 than C++, except in syntax.
Growing table compares D, C, C++, C#, Java, Delphi, Python, Perl, Eiffel, Sather, Smalltalk, Lisp/CLOS, Ada. Many clarifying comments below. [Wiki4D, Open Content]
Multipage study compares: 4GL/5GL, 3GL (Ada 95, C, C++, COBOL, FORTRAN, Java, Smalltalk), 2GL (Assembly). Divides language (definition) from traits of products that implement and support it. Several sections, tables, appendixes.
Brian Kernighan's comparison of Pascal and C
Suite of common programming problems solved in Ada, C++, Erlang, Guile, Haskell, Java, Masd, merd, NASM, Objective Caml, Perl, Pliant, Python, Ruby, Tcl.
Also compares C#, Java, C++. By Ben Albahari.
Author explains what he considers wrong about Perl, presents Python as an alternative. Descriptions, code samples, links.
TOM attempts to address flaws in these languages: C++, Cecil, Common Lisp, Eiffel, Java, Objective-C, Smalltalk.
Many comparisons between Tcl/Tk and other similar systems, most copied from comp.lang.tcl.
Collection of self-reproducing programs: each outputs a copy of its own source code; about 60 languages.
Text treats general aspects of language choices, then compares hatred of Perl, Python, Ruby, PHP, Java, C, C++, JavaScript, XSLT, SQL. With many forum comments. [ONLamp.com]
(May 12, 2003)
Programming guru, Robert Martin, on languages of the coming decade. [ITworld.com]
(March 01, 2001)
Compares 4 languages: C, C++, C#, Java. Shows family genealogy. [Dr. Dobb's Journal]
(September 04, 2000)
Interview with Dennis Ritchie, Bjarne Stroustrup, James Gosling.
(July 01, 2000)
By Lutz Prechelt. Neutral, quantitative analysis of 7 languages in title, for 7 variables, via 80 implementations of the same requirement set. PDF format. [IEEE Computer]
[PDF] (March 14, 2000)
Last update:
October 29, 2023 at 5:25:12 UTC
Check out
Society: Relationships: Marriage: Education and Enrichment: Marriage Encounter
- Recently edited by merlin1
- Recently edited by merlin1