Talk:List of language developers
RLevine (talk) 04:49, 23 November 2020 (UTC) 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. [Addendum - Thanks for noting - I added tilde string.]
- (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)
- RLevine (talk) 05:26, 23 November 2020 (UTC) Based on your comments (and thanks) I'm glad I reached out for feedback. I think I better understand the intent of this page. I found a page closer to what I was looking for (Running APL). When I initially searched, I used "APL vendors" and was re-directed here which led to some "wheel-spinning" on my part looking for a list of APL's I can use now. Which seems to be what Running APL intends. So now I am suggesting just to add a related link on "Language Developer" page pointing to the page "Running APL". Or do we put at the top "If you're looking for current APLs click here ...". Whatever is the usual practice on this wiki.
- I would suggest re-organizing (without changing) to separate APL from derivative languages in some way.
- I agree with your observation on GNU Community. Not sure the intention of including it under Organizations. I think it's a user group like any other user group (As the GNU APL website state: "This web page contains links to contributions from users of GNU APL, aka. "the GNU APL community"). I suggest removing "GNU APL Community" from Organizations and replacing with the GNU APL developer Jürgen Sauermann in the list of language developers. This is based on what's in the current GNU APL website. This also seems to be in line with the purpose of the page.