[erlang-questions] OT: Please highlight me about JAVA C++ as high level languages just like erlang.

[黃耀賢 (Yau-Hsien Huang)]

If the level of a language depends on its place in architectures,
classification results will be different between scripting Erlang, compiled
Erlang, and Erlang on top-level.

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Angel <clist@REDACTED> wrote:

>
> So im really displeased to see everyone still closely tied to the "old
> classic
> high level definition". its dificult to place erlang over a plethora of not
> certainly better languages if all of them are considered equal.
>
> As Paul rants i think the long lisp reluctance is mainly based on such a
> missconception about language expresivennes provided that all being equal
> level so the more C'ish the better.
>
> /Angel
> On Jueves, 21 de Enero de 2010 14:19:08 Attila Rajmund Nohl escribió:
> > 2010/1/21, Angel J. Alvarez Miguel <clist@REDACTED>:
> > [...]
> >
> > > Can be Java High level on the same category as C (pointers, arrays), no
> > > closures, bad generics, even no OOP with mehods calls as messages also
> > > like C++?
> >
> > In my experience everything other than the assembler is considered to
> > be a "high level" language. This is probably a couple of decades old
> > definition of high level language, created at a time when FORTRAN,
> > COBOL and Lisp were the high level languages.
> >
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > erlang-questions mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> > erlang-questions (at) erlang.org
> >
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org
>
>