From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2011-08-02T00:00:31+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby a "4th generation language"? Credible sources?

On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Chad Perrin <code@apotheon.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 04:24:43PM +0900, Mike Stephens wrote:
>> Third generation came into mark the first languages a level above
>> assembler. Fourth generation was applied to things like Focus which
>> dealt with typical DP tasks by removing some of the chores,
>> particularly empty datasets or starts/ends of datasets. That theme
>> would lead you to say SQL or say PL/SQL were 4GL but of course people
>> now expect more of a programming language so would reject these as
>> 'languages'.
>
> More of a language than PL/SQL . . . ?  You're aware that PL/SQL is
> actually a Turing-complete programming language -- right?

Actually, PL/SQL is a pretty good procedural language with a decent
module system.  Unfortunately it's abused even in the domain where it
resides (Oracle database) but the blame cannot be put on the language.

It's also noteworthy that SQL is not a programming language _at all_.
It's a declarative language used to describe tuples and sets of
tuples.  Full story @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sql

Kind regards

robert

-- 
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/