www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - TIOBE october

reply Laeeth Isharc <Laeeth.nospam nospam-laeeth.com> writes:
http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html

d up from 31 in march.  Just below scala, sas, and fortran.  No 
doubt noisy, and possibly news about Andrei leaving Facebook had 
an influence.  They changed the algorithm to be more tolerant of 
noise, which has had an impact on the results (which might also 
be a hint about the degree of precision in such an exercise) but 
don't say how that affected D, if at all.
Oct 06 2015
next sibling parent reply Israel <tl12000 live.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 03:26:37 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:

 http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html

 d up from 31 in march.  Just below scala, sas, and fortran.  No 
 doubt noisy, and possibly news about Andrei leaving Facebook 
 had an influence.  They changed the algorithm to be more 
 tolerant of noise, which has had an impact on the results 
 (which might also be a hint about the degree of precision in 
 such an exercise) but don't say how that affected D, if at all.


By noisy you mean hype?
Oct 06 2015
parent Laeeth Isharc <laeethnospam nospam.laeeth.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 04:00:02 UTC, Israel wrote:

 On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 03:26:37 UTC, Laeeth Isharc 
 wrote:

 http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html

 d up from 31 in march.  Just below scala, sas, and fortran.  
 No doubt noisy, and possibly news about Andrei leaving 
 Facebook had an influence.  They changed the algorithm to be 
 more tolerant of noise, which has had an impact on the results 
 (which might also be a hint about the degree of precision in 
 such an exercise) but don't say how that affected D, if at all.


 By noisy you mean hype?


Having a high element that doesn't relate to the underlying 
phenomenon one is trying to measure.  That's intrinsic to the 
problem domain, at least if you approach it in this way.
Oct 06 2015
prev sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 03:26:37 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:

 http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html

 d up from 31 in march.  Just below scala, sas, and fortran.  No 
 doubt noisy, and possibly news about Andrei leaving Facebook 
 had an influence.  They changed the algorithm to be more 
 tolerant of noise, which has had an impact on the results 
 (which might also be a hint about the degree of precision in 
 such an exercise) but don't say how that affected D, if at all.


Really, TIOBE doesn't mean much, but it is interesting to see 
that D is _way_ above Rust (which is barely in the top 50), and 
Go didn't make the top 50 at all. I typically hear way more about 
Go and Rust from folks outside of the newsgroup than I ever hear 
about D. So, if anything, that may just show how unreliable TIOBE 
is as a real measurement of language popularity or usage, but it 
is interesting that we're that high up in comparison to the newer 
languages that we usually get compared with.

- Jonathan M Davis
Oct 07 2015
parent Laeeth Isharc <laeethnospam nospam.laeeth.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 10:55:21 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:

 On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 03:26:37 UTC, Laeeth Isharc 
 wrote:

 http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html

 d up from 31 in march.  Just below scala, sas, and fortran.  
 No doubt noisy, and possibly news about Andrei leaving 
 Facebook had an influence.  They changed the algorithm to be 
 more tolerant of noise, which has had an impact on the results 
 (which might also be a hint about the degree of precision in 
 such an exercise) but don't say how that affected D, if at all.


 Really, TIOBE doesn't mean much, but it is interesting to see 
 that D is _way_ above Rust (which is barely in the top 50), and 
 Go didn't make the top 50 at all. I typically hear way more 
 about Go and Rust from folks outside of the newsgroup than I 
 ever hear about D. So, if anything, that may just show how 
 unreliable TIOBE is as a real measurement of language 
 popularity or usage, but it is interesting that we're that high 
 up in comparison to the newer languages that we usually get 
 compared with.

 - Jonathan M Davis


Yes.  TIOBE probably wrong about popularity, and although it is 
in our favour, it's probably a mistake to point to TIOBE, and 
indeed nobody here does.
Oct 07 2015