Search Results

Search found 5206 results on 209 pages for 'spoken languages'.

Page 8/209 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • What are some non-MS languages that can write xlsx (Excel 2007+) documents efficiently?

    - by Honus Wagner
    Unfortunately, Excel format is required for the project I am working on. I have no problems getting the data I need in objects and arrays, and currently PHPExcel is doing handling the document generation. It works, but it's slow and loopy. Was wondering if there is a more efficient server language to generate Excel documents (not CSVs). This is a pure Linux environment so I need to stay away from .NET. I am open to any programming language that does it cleanly and efficiently. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is there a well grounded theory on backward and forward compatibility of formats, languages, grammars and vocabularies?

    - by Breton
    I have a friend who has the specific problem of building a case against the use of a custom HTML <wrapper> tag in some site's markup. Now, intuitively we can answer that use of such a tag is risky, as future HTML specs may define a wrapper tag with semantics that conflict with its use on the site. We can also appeal to a particular section of the HTML5 spec which also recommends against the use of custom tags for this reason. And while I agree with the conclusion, I find these arguments a little on the weak side, on their own. Is there some well grounded and proven theory in computer science from which we can derive this conclusion? Have programming language theorists created proofs about the properties of vocabulary versioning, or some such thing?

    Read the article

  • What's the reason exceptions are heavily used in managed (C# and Java) languages but not in C++? [on hold]

    - by ZijingWu
    AFAIK, a lot of C++ projects don't allow exceptions and deny them in coding guidelines. I have a lot of reasons, for example, exception is hard to handle correctly if your binary needs to be compiled by separate and different compilers. But it doesn't fully convince me, there is a lot of projects which are just using one compiler. Compared to C++, exceptions are heavily used in C# and Java and the reason can only be that exception are not bringing enough benefit. One point is debugbility in practice. Exception can not get the call stack in C++ code, but in C# and Java you can get the call stack from exception, it is significant and makes debugging easier. No-callstack is not the fault of the exception, it is the language difference, but it impacts the exception usage. So what's the reason that exceptions are frowned upon in c++ programs?

    Read the article

  • what languages are used in AI research today?

    - by aaa
    hi. I am currently dabbling in expert systems, emacs lisp, and reading up about artificial intelligence. Traditionally, artificial intelligence is associated with LISP and expert systems with CLIPS. However, I have noticed in computational sciences how much Python is being used. What about the area of artificial intelligence and machine learning? is it still been dominated by LISP? how much is python being used in AI? are any of the newer functional languages, clojure for example, being used in research? in the area of expert systems, which shells are most used/popular today? are there any interesting developments language wise which you know of? Thanks a lot

    Read the article

  • Are All Dynamic Languages Typo-friendly?

    - by yar
    With Java on one side and Ruby/Groovy on the other, I know that in the second camp I'm free to make typos which will not get caught until run-time. Is this true of all dynamically-typed languages? Edit: I've been asked to elaborate on the type of typo. In Ruby and in Groovy, you can assign to a variable with an accidental name that is never read. You can call methods that don't exist (obviously your tests should catch this, it's been said). You can refer to classes that don't exist, etc. etc. Basically any valid syntax, even with typographical errors, is valid in both Ruby and Groovy.

    Read the article

  • Practical non-Turing-complete languages?

    - by Kyle Cronin
    Nearly all programming languages used are Turing Complete, and while this affords the language to represent any computable algorithm, it also comes with its own set of problems. Seeing as all the algorithms I write are intended to halt, I would like to be able to represent them in a language that guarantees they will halt. Regular expressions used for matching strings and finite state machines are used when lexing, but I'm wondering if there's a more general, broadly language that's not Turing complete? edit: I should clarify, by 'general purpose' I don't necessarily want to be able to write all halting algorithms in the language (I don't think that such a language would exist) but I suspect that there are common threads in halting proofs that can be generalized to produce a language in which all algorithms are guaranteed to halt. There's also another way to tackle this problem - eliminate the need for theoretically infinite memory. Once you limit the amount of memory the machine is allowed, the number of states the machine is in is finite and countable, and therefore you can determine if the algorithm will halt (by not allowing the machine to move into a state it's been in before).

    Read the article

  • Functional languages targeting the LLVM

    - by Matthew
    Are there any languages that target the LLVM that: Are statically typed Use type inference Are functional (i.e. lambda expressions, closures, list primitives, list comprehensions, etc.) Have first class object-oriented features (inheritance, polymorphism, mixins, etc.) Have a sophisticated type system (generics, covariance and contravariance, etc.) Scala is all of these, but only targets the JVM. F# (and to some extent C#) is most if not all of these, but only targets .NET. What similar language targets the LLVM?

    Read the article

  • Django: Admin with multiple sites & languages

    - by lazerscience
    Hi everybody! I'm supposed to build some Django apps, that allow you to administer multiple sites through one backend. The contrib.sites framework is quite perfect for my purposes. I can run multiple instances of manage.py with different settings for each site; but how should django's admin deal with different settings for different sites, eg. if they have different sets of languages, a different (default) language? So there are some problem s to face if you have to work on objects coming from different sites in one admin... I think settings.ADMIN_FOR is supposed to be quite helpful for cases like this, but theres hardly any documentation about it and I think it's not really used in the actual Django version (?). So any ideas/solutions are welcome and much appreciated! Thanks a lot...

    Read the article

  • Statement hierarchy in programming languages

    - by sudo
    I quickly wrote an interpreter for some sort of experimental programing language i came up with, in PHP (yes, in PHP). The language itself doesn't have anything really special, I just wanted to give it a try. I got the basic things working (Hello World, input to output, string manipulation, arithmetics) but I'm getting stuck with the management of blocks and grouped statements. What I mean is: PHP and most other languages let you do this: ((2+2)*(8+2)+2), of course not only with mathematical computations. My program structure currently consists of a multidimensional array built like this: ID => Type (Identifier, String, Int, Newline, EOF, Comma, ...) Contents (If identifier, int or string) How could I allow statements to be executed in a defined order like in the PHP example above?

    Read the article

  • Java compilers or JVM languages that support goto?

    - by unknown
    Is there a java compiler flag that allows me to use goto as a valid construct? If not, are there any third-party java compilers that supports goto? If not, are there any other languages that support goto while at the same time can easily call methods written in Java? The reason is I'm making a language that is implemented in Java. Gotos are an important part of my language; I want to be able to compile it to native or JVM bytecode, although it has to be able to easily use Java libraries (ie. C supports goto, but to use it I'd have to rewrite the libraries in C). I want to generate C or Java, etc source files, and not bytecode or machine code. I'm using a third-party compiler to do that.

    Read the article

  • Share and Deliver BI Publisher Reports in Multiple Languages

    - by kanichiro.nishida
    When you share your reports with someone who speak and read in different languages you want your reports to be shown in their language, right ? Well, translating reports with BI Publisher is not only easy but also reduces the maintenance cost a lot. Many of us in the BI Publisher product development team used to work in Globalization and Multi Lingual support, which enables Oracle products and applications to be used in many different languages and countries and territories.  And we have a lot of experience in this area. In fact, being a strategic reporting platform for Oracle EBS, PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, Siebel, and many other Oracle application products, our customers from all over the world are generating thousands of thousands of reports, including out-of-the-box pre-developed reports from Oracle and customer created or customized reports, in their own local language everyday as they operate and manage their business. Today, I’m going to talk about this very topic, how to translate my reports with BI Publisher 11G. Translation Grows, not the Numbers of the Reports Most of the reporting tools, regardless if it’s traditional or new, always take this translation on the back burner. They require their users to copy an original report and translate the whole thing. So when you want to support additional10 languages you will need to have 10 copies of the original. Imagine when you have 50 reports then you will end up having 500 reports (50 x 10) ! Now you need to maintain these 500 reports, whenever you need to make a change in a report you need to apply the same change to the other 10 reports. And as you imagine this is not only a nightmare for IT managements but not acceptable especially for the applications like Oracle EBS that supports over 30 languages. So first thing we did was, very simple, we separated the translation out of the report and marry it to the report only at the report generation. This means, regardless of how many languages you need to support you need to have only one report and translation files for the 10 languages, which would contain the translated letters and words. So let’s say you have 50 reports and need to support 10 languages for those reports you still have only 50 reports and each report now has 10 language translation files. Yes, translation is the one should grow as you add more languages to support, not the report itself! And second, we provide the translation files in XLIFF format, which is an international standard XML based format to exchange and maintain translation strings. So once you generate the XLIFF files for your reports with BI Publisher then you can work with any translation vendors in the world to make a mass translation or you can translate the XML files by yourself by manually updating the translatable strings presented in this text file. Lastly, we made it easier to manage the translation process starting from generating the XLIFF files to uploading the translated XLIFF files back to the BI Publisher server. You can generate, download, upload the XLIFF files from the BI Publisher’s Web interface with your browser and you can see the translated reports right away without needing to shutdown or restart your server. While the translated reports are displayed based on your language preference setting you can also specify a different language when you schedule or deliver the reports so that they can be generated in your customer’s preferred language. What Can I Translate? When it comes to translation there are three things. First, report content translation. When you receive a report you like to see the content like report title, section title, comments, annotation, table column header, and anything that are static and embedded in the report. in your preferred language. We call this Reports Content translation. Second, when you open a report online you might want to see not only the report content being translated but also the report UI, such as report name, parameter name, layout name, and anything that would help you to navigate around the reports, to be translated in your language. We call this Reports UI translation. And this separation of the Reports Content and Reports UI translation makes it very useful especially when you want to navigate through the reports in your preferred language UI but want to generate the reports in your customer’s preferred language. Imagine you are English native speaker and need to generate and send a report to your customers in China. You like to see the report name, parameter name in English so that you can comfortably navigate to the report and generate the report output, but like to see the report generated in Chinese so that the your customers in China can understand the report when they receive it. And lastly, you might want to see even the data presented in the report to be translated. For example, you might want to see product names in an Order Status report to be translated based on the report viewer’s language preference. We call this Reporting Data translation. Since this Reporting Data translation is maintained at the data source level such as Database tables along with the main data, you need to prepare the translation at the data source level first. Then, you want to make sure that your query is switched accordingly based on the language preference setting so that the translated data will be retrieved. How to Translate BI Publisher Reports? Now when it comes to ‘how to translate BI Publisher reports?’ the main focus here is about the translation for the Report Content and Report UI. And I just created this video to show you how to create and manage the translation with BI Publisher 11G. Please take a look at the clip below.   In today’s business world, customers and suppliers are from all over the world regardless of the size of the company or organization. Supporting multiple languages for your reports is no longer something ‘nice to have’, it’s mandatory. BI Publisher is designed to support multi lingual reports from the beginning without any extra hidden cost of license or configuration like other reporting tools such as Crystal Reports. You can support additional languages translation at any time with the very simple steps shown in the video above. Happy translation! Please share your translation experience with us! 

    Read the article

  • Extending Programming Languages

    - by chpwn
    (Since I just posted this in another question, but my browser had to be annoying and submit it without content first, here it is again:) I'm a fan of clean code. I like my languages to be able to express what I'm trying to do, but I like the syntax to mirror that too. For example, I work on a lot of programs in Objective-C for jailbroken iPhones, which patch other code using the method_setImplementation() function of the runtime. Or, in pyobjc, I have to use the syntax UIView.initWithFrame_(), which is also pretty awful and unreadable with the way the method names are structured. In both cases, the language does not support this in syntax. I've found three basic ways that this is done: Insane macros. Take a look at this "CaptainHook", it does what I'm looking for in a usable way, but it isn't quite clean and is a major hack. There's also "Logos", which implements a very nice syntax, but is written in Perl parsing my code with a ton of regular expressions. This scares me. I like the idea of adding a %hook ClassName, but not by using regular expressions to parse C or Objective-C. Finally, there is Cycript. This is an extension to JavaScript which interfaces with the Objective-C runtime and allows you to use Objective-C style code in your JavaScript, and inject that into other processes. This is likely the cleanest as it actually uses a parser for the JavaScript, but I'm not a huge fan of that language in general. Basically, this is a two part question. Should, and how should, I create an extension to Python and Objective-C to allow me to do this? Is it worth writing a parser for my language to transform the syntax into something nicer, if it is only in a very specialized niche like this? Should I just live with the horrible syntax of the default Objective-C hooking or pyobjc?

    Read the article

  • Which frameworks (and associated languages) support class replacement?

    - by Alix
    Hi, I'm writing my master thesis, which deals with AOP in .NET, among other things, and I mention the lack of support for replacing classes at load time as an important factor in the fact that there are currently no .NET AOP frameworks that perform true dynamic weaving -- not without imposing the requirement that woven classes must extend ContextBoundObject or MarshalByRefObject or expose all their semantics on an interface. You can however do this with the JVM thanks to ClassFileTransformer: You extend ClassFileTransformer. You subscribe to the class load event. On class load, you rewrite the class and replace it. All this is very well, but my project director has asked me, quite in the last minute, to give him a list of frameworks (and associated languages) that do / do not support class replacement. I really have no time to look for this now: I wouldn't feel comfortable just doing a superficial research and potentially putting erroneous information in my thesis. So I ask you, oh almighty programming community, can you help out? Of course, I'm not asking you to research this yourselves. Simply, if you know for sure that a particular framework supports / doesn't support this, leave it as an answer. If you're not sure please don't forget to point it out. Thanks so much!

    Read the article

  • Which languages support class replacement?

    - by Alix
    Hi, I'm writing my master thesis, which deals with AOP in .NET, among other things, and I mention the lack of support for replacing classes at load time as an important factor in the fact that there are currently no .NET AOP frameworks that perform true dynamic weaving -- not without imposing the requirement that woven classes must extend ContextBoundObject or MarshalByRefObject or expose all their semantics on an interface. You can however do this in Java thanks to ClassFileTransformer: You extend ClassFileTransformer. You subscribe to the class load event. On class load, you rewrite the class and replace it. All this is very well, but my project director has asked me, quite in the last minute, to give him a list of languages that do / do not support class replacement. I really have no time to look for this now: I wouldn't feel comfortable just doing a superficial research and potentially putting erroneous information in my thesis. So I ask you, oh almighty programming community, can you help out? Of course, I'm not asking you to research this yourselves. Simply, if you know for sure that a particular language supports / doesn't support this, leave it as an answer. If you're not sure please don't forget to point it out. Thanks so much!

    Read the article

  • What defines a language as a scripting language? [closed]

    - by Mathew Foscarini
    Possible Duplicate: What is the main difference between Scripting Languages and Programming Languages? I'd like to know what defines a language as a scripting language compared against other programming languages. Some possible scripting languages might include AutoCad LISP, Linux Bash, DOS Batch, Javascript or ActionScript in Flash. Where is the distinction made that makes a language a scripting language? Are there a set of clearly define rules to classify it as such?

    Read the article

  • Should I expect to know a lot about every language I put on my resume as a college student?

    - by Newbie_code
    If I am asked to program an algorithm, say binary search, in languages other than Java during an interview, I will have a hard time trying to remember the syntax. Is it okay to tell my interviewer that I can only code this in Java, because I have worked with other languages before but have not used them for a while? If not, what suggestions do you have (i.e. what languages and parts of those languages among these should I pick up the syntax of before my interview)?

    Read the article

  • Introducing functional programming constructs in non-functional programming languages

    - by Giorgio
    This question has been going through my mind quite a lot lately and since I haven't found a convincing answer to it I would like to know if other users of this site have thought about it as well. In the recent years, even though OOP is still the most popular programming paradigm, functional programming is getting a lot of attention. I have only used OOP languages for my work (C++ and Java) but I am trying to learn some FP in my free time because I find it very interesting. So, I started learning Haskell three years ago and Scala last summer. I plan to learn some SML and Caml as well, and to brush up my (little) knowledge of Scheme. Well, a lot of plans (too ambitious?) but I hope I will find the time to learn at least the basics of FP during the next few years. What is important for me is how functional programming works and how / whether I can use it for some real projects. I have already developed small tools in Haskell. In spite of my strong interest for FP, I find it difficult to understand why functional programming constructs are being added to languages like C#, Java, C++, and so on. As a developer interested in FP, I find it more natural to use, say, Scala or Haskell, instead of waiting for the next FP feature to be added to my favourite non-FP language. In other words, why would I want to have only some FP in my originally non-FP language instead of looking for a language that has a better support for FP? For example, why should I be interested to have lambdas in Java if I can switch to Scala where I have much more FP concepts and access all the Java libraries anyway? Similarly: why do some FP in C# instead of using F# (to my knowledge, C# and F# can work together)? Java was designed to be OO. Fine. I can do OOP in Java (and I would like to keep using Java in that way). Scala was designed to support OOP + FP. Fine: I can use a mix of OOP and FP in Scala. Haskell was designed for FP: I can do FP in Haskell. If I need to tune the performance of a particular module, I can interface Haskell with some external routines in C. But why would I want to do OOP with just some basic FP in Java? So, my main point is: why are non-functional programming languages being extended with some functional concept? Shouldn't it be more comfortable (interesting, exciting, productive) to program in a language that has been designed from the very beginning to be functional or multi-paradigm? Don't different programming paradigms integrate better in a language that was designed for it than in a language in which one paradigm was only added later? The first explanation I could think of is that, since FP is a new concept (it isn't new at all, but it is new for many developers), it needs to be introduced gradually. However, I remember my switch from imperative to OOP: when I started to program in C++ (coming from Pascal and C) I really had to rethink the way in which I was coding, and to do it pretty fast. It was not gradual. So, this does not seem to be a good explanation to me. Or can it be that many non-FP programmers are not really interested in understanding and using functional programming, but they find it practically convenient to adopt certain FP-idioms in their non-FP language? IMPORTANT NOTE Just in case (because I have seen several language wars on this site): I mentioned the languages I know better, this question is in no way meant to start comparisons between different programming languages to decide which is better / worse. Also, I am not interested in a comparison of OOP versus FP (pros and cons). The point I am interested in is to understand why FP is being introduced one bit at a time into existing languages that were not designed for it even though there exist languages that were / are specifically designed to support FP.

    Read the article

  • Functional programming constructs in non-functional programming languages

    - by Giorgio
    This question has been going through my mind quite a lot lately and since I haven't found a convincing answer to it I would like to know if other users of this site have thought about it as well. In the recent years, even though OOP is still the most popular programming paradigm, functional programming is getting a lot of attention. I have only used OOP languages for my work (C++ and Java) but I am trying to learn some FP in my free time because I find it very interesting. So, I started learning Haskell three years ago and Scala last summer. I plan to learn some SML and Caml as well, and to brush up my (little) knowledge of Scheme. Well, a lot of plans (too ambitious?) but I hope I will find the time to learn at least the basics of FP during the next few years. What is important for me is how functional programming works and how / whether I can use it for some real projects. I have already developed small tools in Haskell. In spite of my strong interest for FP, I find it difficult to understand why functional programming constructs are being added to languages like C#, Java, C++, and so on. As a developer interested in FP, I find it more natural to use, say, Scala or Haskell, instead of waiting for the next FP feature to be added to my favourite non-FP language. In other words, why would I want to have only some FP in my originally non-FP language instead of looking for a language that has a better support for FP? For example, why should I be interested to have lambdas in Java if I can switch to Scala where I have much more FP concepts and access all the Java libraries anyway? Similarly: why do some FP in C# instead of using F# (to my knowledge, C# and F# can work together)? Java was designed to be OO. Fine. I can do OOP in Java (and I would like to keep using Java in that way). Scala was designed to support OOP + FP. Fine: I can use a mix of OOP and FP in Scala. Haskell was designed for FP: I can do FP in Haskell. If I need to tune the performance of a particular module, I can interface Haskell with some external routines in C. But why would I want to do OOP with just some basic FP in Java? So, my main point is: why are non-functional programming languages being extended with some functional concept? Shouldn't it be more comfortable (interesting, exciting, productive) to program in a language that has been designed from the very beginning to be functional or multi-paradigm? Don't different programming paradigms integrate better in a language that was designed for it than in a language in which one paradigm was only added later? The first explanation I could think of is that, since FP is a new concept (it isn't new at all, but it is new for many developers), it needs to be introduced gradually. However, I remember my switch from imperative to OOP: when I started to program in C++ (coming from Pascal and C) I really had to rethink the way in which I was coding, and to do it pretty fast. It was not gradual. So, this does not seem to be a good explanation to me. Also, I asked myself if my impression is just plainly wrong due to lack of knowledge. E.g., do C# and C++11 support FP as extensively as, say, Scala or Caml do? In this case, my question would be simply non-existent. Or can it be that many non-FP programmers are not really interested in using functional programming, but they find it practically convenient to adopt certain FP-idioms in their non-FP language? IMPORTANT NOTE Just in case (because I have seen several language wars on this site): I mentioned the languages I know better, this question is in no way meant to start comparisons between different programming languages to decide which is better / worse. Also, I am not interested in a comparison of OOP versus FP (pros and cons). The point I am interested in is to understand why FP is being introduced one bit at a time into existing languages that were not designed for it even though there exist languages that were / are specifically designed to support FP.

    Read the article

  • Misconceptions about purely functional languages?

    - by Giorgio
    I often encounter the following statements / arguments: Pure functional programming languages do not allow side effects (and are therefore of little use in practice because any useful program does have side effects, e.g. when it interacts with the external world). Pure functional programming languages do not allow to write a program that maintains state (which makes programming very awkward because in many application you do need state). I am not an expert in functional languages but here is what I have understood about these topics until now. Regarding point 1, you can interact with the environment in purely functional languages but you have to explicitly mark the code (functions) that introduces them (e.g. in Haskell by means of monadic types). Also, AFAIK computing by side effects (destructively updating data) should also be possible (using monadic types?) but is not the preferred way of working. Regarding point 2, AFAIK you can represent state by threading values through several computation steps (in Haskell, again, using monadic types) but I have no practical experience doing this and my understanding is rather vague. So, are the two statements above correct in any sense or are they just misconceptions about purely functional languages? If they are misconceptions, how did they come about? Could you write a (possibly small) code snippet illustrating the Haskell idiomatic way to (1) implement side effects and (2) implement a computation with state?

    Read the article

  • Are dynamic languages at disadvantage for agile development?

    - by Gerenuk
    From what I've read agile development often involves refactoring or reverse engineering code into diagrams. Of course there is much more than that, but if we consider the practices that rely on these two methods, are dynamically typed languages at disadvantage? It seem static typing would make refactoring and reverse engineering much easier? Refactoring or (automated) reverse engineering is hard if not impossible in dynamically typed languages? What does real world projects tell about usage of dynamically typed languages for agile methodology?

    Read the article

  • Chained inequality notation in programming languages

    - by Davorin
    Is there a programming language that supports chained notation a < b < c to be used instead of a < b and b < c in conditional statements? Example: if ( 2 < x < 5 ) if ( 2 < x && x < 5 ) First statementlooks better to me, it's easier to understand and the compiler could use transitivity property to warn about mistakes (e.g. 5 < x < 2 would give a warning).

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >