Talk:List of language developers

I think it would be more useful to split the Vendors and Organizations lists into two parts: (1) active (2) inactive (for want of a better term). As it's a wiki, if an "inactive" implementation is actually "active", or vice versa, that can be easily fixed and referenced appropriately. I also think a page called "APL Implementations" could be created with a redirect to this page. The Language developer page also includes languages derived from APL such as J and K, which is fine, but also I think would be more useful if put into separate lists.


 * (RLevine, remember to sign comments with ). Given that hardware vendors are strictly a subset of inactive developers, and all the individual developers listed have been active in the past few years, we could do both: inactive developers with subheadings hardware vendors and other developers, and active developers with subheadings vendors, organizations (although I remain skeptical that the GNU APL community can really be considered an organization that develops APL), and independent developers. --Marshall (talk) 20:42, 20 November 2020 (UTC)