Which programming language has the least amount of syntax? How can I calculate how many syntax a programming language has?
Thanks.
A:
I find Applescript to be close to english and I feel there are less things you need to remember on a longer run.
Pradeep
2009-07-04 08:39:40
But English has horrible syntax! :)
Marcus Downing
2009-07-04 09:53:59
+8
A:
LISP-derived, Forth-derived and Smalltalk-derived (IO?) languages probably have the least syntax, in that order.
And you can't measure it, because it's not technical, it's social.
alamar
2009-07-04 08:40:02
Forth has very little syntax, though variants build on it. Postscript (and by extension PDF) is a similar model to Forth, but with a lot more syntax.
Marcus Downing
2009-07-04 09:56:17
I think Ook! has less syntax. =) http://www.dangermouse.net/esoteric/ook.html
wai
2009-07-04 08:55:05
Both Ook! and Brainfuck have 8 productions, so have the same amount of syntax. Ook! uses multi-token productions, so arguably has more complicated syntax.
Pete Kirkham
2009-07-04 10:48:30
Brainfuck is useful. How many rep point did we get just using it in an anwser ?
e-satis
2009-07-04 12:04:39
**Important** I upvoted this not because of the snark brainfuck answer, that answers the question explicitly. It was because this links to Ruby, a wonderful example of a programming language that makes your fingers and eyes hurt less.
Sam Saffron
2009-07-04 12:47:20
+2
A:
A Hello World in Brainfuck
++++++++++[>+++++++>++++++++++>+++>+<<<<-]>++.>+.+++++++..+++.>++.<<+++++++++++++++.>.+++.------.--------.>+.>.
m3rLinEz
2009-07-04 08:45:20
Sometimes I tell myself I'll learn brainfuck. Just for laughs, you know? Then I double take at how you do something simple like hello world, or multiplication. Then I go to a therapist for weeks 'cause you know. Brain fuck'd.
Carson Myers
2009-07-04 09:08:12
@Carson I learnt brainfuck this weekend. It's really easy. I mean, yeah, it takes for ever to write anything at all useful, but I worked out how to add two integers together and print the result (as long as the result is less than 10).
Skilldrick
2010-05-16 21:02:36
+3
A:
Programming languages that are implemented very close to some simple computational model are likely to have very little syntax.
- Assembly languages, ie the x86 assembly, based on Turing machine model.
- Lisp and Lisp derived languages that are based on Lambda calculus.
Nick D
2009-07-04 09:26:29
Last time I checked, my Intel computer didn't have a tape inside. x86 is register based.
Pete Kirkham
2009-07-04 09:39:17
The Turing machine has very few instructions with operate on the tape, which is a single stream of data and instructions with O(N) access. x86 is CISC device, and most read/writes operate on random access memory, not on the instruction stream. If anything it's based on Von-Neumann with separation of instruction and data - later variants have support to prevent you executing read/write memory.
Pete Kirkham
2009-07-04 11:31:05
+1
A:
It rather depends on your definition of syntax. For example, Subtext no textual syntax, but quite a lot of visual syntax.
Pete Kirkham
2009-07-04 10:45:50
A:
Not sure about "least" amount of syntax, but if you mean succinct/lightweight, then undoubtedly the K language has to be a strong competitor.
Noldorin
2009-07-04 10:52:18
+2
A:
If I guess your purpose correctly, Python has no more or less "syntax" than any other language, but it has less "strange funny symbols" than any other language I know. And it uses simplified, mostly plain English syntax.
If you're looking for a serious language in which it'd be easy to read and write, but still be prouctive, go for Python.
Or visual basic, which is becoming more and more bloated over the years, and it has syntax incompatibility issues with earlier versions - so I can't recommend VB.
Berry Tsakala
2009-07-04 11:30:16
A:
Most modern languages have relatively few keywords and operators. They usually have some way of indicating a logic block. The problem is that fewer keywords and operators don't usually mean easier to read and understand code - just look at BrainFuck - 4 operators, no keywords and pretty useless.
More 'natural' languages are more verbose and have a lot of syntax, but can be easier for a beginner.
Java, C#, Javascript and loads more languages share the same basic syntax. They all have their own extra keywords and operators, but if you're going to learn one basic syntax their's is where to start - if you can code in one you can read the others.
Keith
2009-07-04 11:59:25
A:
As far as I can tell, I tried :
- Assembly;
- C/C++;
- Java;
- C#;
- PHP;
- Java;
- Python;
- Ruby;
- Bash;
- Perl.
Excepting bash, wich I do not even thing about when it comes to programming more that scripting, Perl has the shortest syntax, but it's one of the slowest to read.
Assembly, C/C++, and Java are really Verbose. C# and PHP less, but still. And you are stuck with .Net or with a language with no naming convention.
The best balance between being concise, powerful and readable are Ruby and Python.
I am a Python lover myself, and I'm use to the syntax so I'll go for it. I don't like the way Ruby ends blocks using keywords.
e-satis
2009-07-04 12:03:20