Peter Hansen peter at engcorp.com
Sat Jan 25 10:06:01 EST 2003

• Previous message (by thread): December 2002 comp.lang.* stats
• Next message (by thread): December 2002 comp.lang.* stats
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

"Aaron K. Johnson" wrote:
> 
> What you see below are pure and simple the number of unique posters to each
> comp.lang.whatever hierarchy in December 2002.
> 
> comp.lang.java 5347
> comp.lang.c++ 3075
> comp.lang.perl 2136
> comp.lang.javascript 2130
> comp.lang.python 1996
> comp.lang.basic 1758
> comp.lang.c 1670
> comp.lang.labview 958
> comp.lang.clipper 922
...
> comp.lang.modula3 30
> comp.lang.oberon 26
> comp.lang.modula2 23
...

Thanks Aaron.  I'm forced to admit that these numbers *appear* to 
correspond to my purely subjective feeling as to the relative
popularity, in a very vague way, of these languages.   It will
be interesting - if you can finish refining the script and then
"lock it down" - to compare the results over time.

I'm also intrigued by the labview and clipper numbers, which are
as I understand the only two purely proprietary languages listed.
National Instruments deserves some credit here, even if it's just
because LabVIEW is such an abomination to use for complex software
that it requires much more online help than the others, relative 
to its actual usage. ;-)

-Peter

---

• Previous message (by thread): December 2002 comp.lang.* stats
• Next message (by thread): December 2002 comp.lang.* stats
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Python-list mailing list