Programming Languages
It's not so great to submit lists of articles, such as the home page of a magazine issue, because then there isn't any content to sink teeth into. Such threads always boil down to lowest-common-denominator, i.e. generic, i.e. low-information discussions.
It's better to submit a specific article and then people can discuss what it says.
It's almost like Turbo Pascal, Delphi, and Object Pascal never existed, yet many applications were written (and are still written, in the case of Object Pascal) in all of them.
It's the same thing with the XBase languages like dBase, Clipper, and FoxPro.
I'm not sure if it's just poor research skills with such articles, or just a general ignorance of PC software development history, but these languages and products were an integral part of the PC revolution.
In the article about non-Turing-complete languages, I kind of expected to find a mention of Dhall which is a fancy new programmable configuration language:
Doesn't even mention Ada...
"Six questions on programming languages" - Which programming languages do you use?
Not a single functional or declarative language. What a waste of an article.
A Brief, Incomplete, and Mostly Wrong History of Programming Languages
Remains the best and most accurate article on programming languages available.
https://james-iry.blogspot.com/2009/05/brief-incomplete-and-...
I think it's great to have an internet magazine of sorts - I do question the approach.
These articles have no logical connection to each other, it's just random bits.
I find that problematic - the only thing holding these articles together is the consistency of the layout and illustrations. In a world where there are more scientific papers, talks, blogs and books than I can consume in my lifetime, I'm not sure what this brings to the table.
The real difficulty is in parsing in all this information, and producing something that explains how the pieces can fit together nicely. This does not do that.