Programming language

This is the latest accepted revision, reviewed on 18 December 2025.

A programming language is an artificial language for expressing computer programs.[1]

The source code for a computer program in C. The gray

lines are comments that explain the program to humans.
When compiled and run, it will give the output "Hello,
world!".

Programming languages typically allow software to be written in a human readable manner.

Execution of a program requires an implementation. There are two main approaches for
implementing a programming language – compilation, where programs are compiled ahead-of-time
to machine code, and interpretation, where programs are directly executed. In addition to these two
extremes, some implementations use hybrid approaches such as just-in-time compilation and
bytecode interpreters.[2]

The design of programming languages has been strongly influenced by computer architecture, with
most imperative languages designed around the ubiquitous von Neumann architecture.[3] While
early programming languages were closely tied to the hardware, modern languages often hide
hardware details via abstraction in an effort to enable better software with less effort.

Related

Programming languages have some similarity to natural languages in that they can allow
communication of ideas between people. That is, programs are generally human-readable and can
express complex ideas. However, the kinds of ideas that programming languages can express are
ultimately limited to the domain of computation.[4]

The term computer language is sometimes used interchangeably with programming language[5] but
some contend they are different concepts. Some contend that programming languages are a subset
of computer languages.[6] Some use computer language to classify a language used in computing
that is not considered a programming language. Some regard a programming language as a
theoretical construct for programming an abstract machine, and a computer language as the subset
thereof that runs on a physical computer, which has finite hardware resources.[7]

John C. Reynolds emphasizes that a formal specification language is as much a programming

language as is a language intended for execution. He argues that textual and even graphical input
formats that affect the behavior of a computer are programming languages, despite the fact they
are commonly not Turing-complete, and remarks that ignorance of programming language concepts
is the reason for many flaws in input formats.[8]

History

Early developments

The first programmable computers were invented during the 1940s, and with them, the first
programming languages.[9] The earliest computers were programmed in first-generation
programming languages (1GLs), machine language (simple instructions that could be directly
executed by the processor). This code was very difficult to debug and was not portable between
different computer systems.[10] In order to improve the ease of programming, assembly languages
(or second-generation programming languages—2GLs) were invented, diverging from the machine
language to make programs easier to understand for humans, although they did not increase
portability.[11]

Initially, hardware resources were scarce and expensive, while human resources were cheaper.
Therefore, cumbersome languages that were time-consuming to use, but were closer to the
hardware for higher efficiency were favored.[12] The introduction of high-level programming
languages (third-generation programming languages—3GLs)—revolutionized programming. These
languages abstracted away the details of the hardware, instead being designed to express
algorithms that could be understood more easily by humans. For example, arithmetic expressions
could now be written in symbolic notation and later translated into machine code that the hardware
could execute.[11] In 1957, Fortran (FORmula TRANslation) was invented. Often considered the first
compiled high-level programming language,[11][13] Fortran has remained in use into the twenty-first
century.[14]

1960s and 1970s

Two people using an IBM 704 mainframe—

the first hardware to support floating-point
arithmetic—in 1957. Fortran was designed
for this machine.[15][14]

Around 1960, the first mainframes—general purpose computers—were developed, although they
could only be operated by professionals and the cost was extreme. The data and instructions were
input by punch cards, meaning that no input could be added while the program was running. The
languages developed at this time therefore are designed for minimal interaction.[16] After the
invention of the microprocessor, computers in the 1970s became dramatically cheaper.[17] New
computers also allowed more user interaction, which was supported by newer programming
languages.[18]

Lisp, implemented in 1958, was the first functional programming language.[19] Unlike Fortran, it
supported recursion and conditional expressions,[20] and it also introduced dynamic memory
management on a heap and automatic garbage collection.[21] For the next decades, Lisp dominated
artificial intelligence applications.[22] In 1978, another functional language, ML, introduced inferred
types and polymorphic parameters.[18][23]

After ALGOL (ALGOrithmic Language) was released in 1958 and 1960,[24] it became the standard in
computing literature for describing algorithms. Although its commercial success was limited, most
popular imperative languages—including C, Pascal, Ada, C++, Java, and C#—are directly or indirectly
descended from ALGOL 60.[25][14] Among its innovations adopted by later programming languages
included greater portability and the first use of context-free, BNF grammar.[26] Simula, the first
language to support object-oriented programming (including subtypes, dynamic dispatch, and
inheritance), also descends from ALGOL and achieved commercial success.[27] C, another ALGOL
descendant, has sustained popularity into the twenty-first century. C allows access to lower-level
machine operations more than other contemporary languages. Its power and efficiency, generated
in part with flexible pointer operations, comes at the cost of making it more difficult to write correct
code.[18]

Prolog, designed in 1972, was the first logic programming language, communicating with a
computer using formal logic notation.[28][29] With logic programming, the programmer specifies a
desired result and allows the interpreter to decide how to achieve it.[30][29]

1980s to 2000s

A small selection of programming

language textbooks

During the 1980s, the invention of the personal computer transformed the roles for which
programming languages were used.[31] New languages introduced in the 1980s included C++, a
superset of C that can compile C programs but also supports classes and inheritance.[32] Ada and
other new languages introduced support for concurrency.[33] The Japanese government invested
heavily into the so-called fifth-generation languages that added support for concurrency to logic
programming constructs, but these languages were outperformed by other concurrency-supporting
languages.[34][35]

Due to the rapid growth of the Internet and the World Wide Web in the 1990s, new programming
languages were introduced to support Web pages and networking.[36] Java, based on C++ and
designed for increased portability across systems and security, enjoyed large-scale success
because these features are essential for many Internet applications.[37][38] Another development
was that of dynamically typed scripting languages—Python, JavaScript, PHP, and Ruby—designed to
quickly produce small programs that coordinate existing applications. Due to their integration with
HTML, they have also been used for building web pages hosted on servers.[39][40]

2000s to present

During the 2000s, there was a slowdown in the development of new programming languages that
achieved widespread popularity.[41] One innovation was service-oriented programming, designed to
exploit distributed systems whose components are connected by a network. Services are similar to
objects in object-oriented programming, but run on a separate process.[42] C# and F# cross-
pollinated ideas between imperative and functional programming.[43] After 2010, several new
languages—Rust, Go, Swift, Zig and Carbon —competed for the performance-critical software for
which C had historically been used.[44] Most of the new programming languages use static typing
while a few numbers of new languages use dynamic typing like Ring and Julia.[45][46]

Some of the new programming languages are classified as visual programming languages like
Scratch, LabVIEW and PWCT. Also, some of these languages mix between textual and visual
programming usage like Ballerina.[47][48][49][50] Also, this trend lead to developing projects that help in
developing new VPLs like Blockly by Google.[51] Many game engines like Unreal and Unity added
support for visual scripting too.[52][53]

Definition

A language can be defined in terms of syntax (form) and semantics (meaning), and often is defined
via a formal language specification.
Syntax

Parse tree of Python code with inset tokenization

Syntax highlighting is often used to aid

programmers in recognizing elements of source
code. The language above is Python.

A programming language's surface form is known as its syntax. Most programming languages are
purely textual; they use sequences of text including words, numbers, and punctuation, much like
written natural languages. On the other hand, some programming languages are graphical, using
visual relationships between symbols to specify a program.

The syntax of a language describes the possible combinations of symbols that form a syntactically
correct program. The meaning given to a combination of symbols is handled by semantics (either
formal or hard-coded in a reference implementation). Since most languages are textual, this article
discusses textual syntax.

The programming language syntax is usually defined using a combination of regular expressions
(for lexical structure) and Backus–Naur form (for grammatical structure). Below is a simple
grammar, based on Lisp:

expression ::= atom | list

atom ::= number | symbol
number ::= [+-]?['0'-'9']+
symbol ::= ['A'-'Z''a'-'z'].*
list ::= '(' expression* ')'

This grammar specifies the following:

an expression is either an atom or a list;

an atom is either a number or a symbol;

a number is an unbroken sequence of one or more decimal digits, optionally preceded by a plus or
minus sign;

a symbol is a letter followed by zero or more of any alphabetical characters (excluding

whitespace); and

a list is a matched pair of parentheses, with zero or more expressions inside it.

The following are examples of well-formed token sequences in this grammar: 12345 , () and (a
b c232 (1)) .

Not all syntactically correct programs are semantically correct. Many syntactically correct programs
are nonetheless ill-formed, per the language's rules, and may (depending on the language
specification and the soundness of the implementation) result in an error on translation or
execution. In some cases, such programs may exhibit undefined behavior. Even when a program is
well-defined within a language, it may still have a meaning that is not intended by the person who
wrote it.

Using natural language as an example, it may not be possible to assign a meaning to a

grammatically correct sentence or the sentence may be false:

"Colorless green ideas sleep furiously." is grammatically well-formed but has no generally
accepted meaning.

"John is a married bachelor." is grammatically well-formed but expresses a meaning that cannot
be true.

The following C language fragment is syntactically correct, but performs operations that are not
semantically defined (the operation *p >> 4 has no meaning for a value having a complex type
and p->im is not defined because the value of p is the null pointer):

complex *p = NULL;
complex abs_p = sqrt(*p >> 4 + p->im);

If the type declaration on the first line were omitted, the program would trigger an error on the
undefined variable p during compilation. However, the program would still be syntactically correct
since type declarations provide only semantic information.

The grammar needed to specify a programming language can be classified by its position in the
Chomsky hierarchy. The syntax of most programming languages can be specified using a Type-2
grammar, i.e., they are context-free grammars.[54] Some languages, including Perl and Lisp, contain
constructs that allow execution during the parsing phase. Languages that have constructs that
allow the programmer to alter the behavior of the parser make syntax analysis an undecidable
problem, and generally blur the distinction between parsing and execution.[55] In contrast to Lisp's
macro system and Perl's BEGIN blocks, which may contain general computations, C macros are
merely string replacements and do not require code execution.[56]

Semantics

Semantics refers to the meaning of content that conforms to a language's syntax.

Static semantics

Static semantics defines restrictions on the structure of valid texts that are hard or impossible to
express in standard syntactic formalisms.[57] For compiled languages, static semantics essentially
include those semantic rules that can be checked at compile time. Examples include checking that
every identifier is declared before it is used (in languages that require such declarations) or that the
labels on the arms of a case statement are distinct.[58] Many important restrictions of this type, like
checking that identifiers are used in the appropriate context (e.g. not adding an integer to a function
name), or that subroutine calls have the appropriate number and type of arguments, can be
enforced by defining them as rules in a logic called a type system. Other forms of static analyses
like data flow analysis may also be part of static semantics. Programming languages such as Java
and C# have definite assignment analysis, a form of data flow analysis, as part of their respective
static semantics.[59]
Dynamic semantics

Once data has been specified, the machine must be instructed to perform operations on the data.
For example, the semantics may define the strategy by which expressions are evaluated to values,
or the manner in which control structures conditionally execute statements. The dynamic semantics
(also known as execution semantics) of a language defines how and when the various constructs of
a language should produce a program behavior. There are many ways of defining execution
semantics. Natural language is often used to specify the execution semantics of languages
commonly used in practice. A significant amount of academic research goes into formal semantics
of programming languages, which allows execution semantics to be specified in a formal manner.
Results from this field of research have seen limited application to programming language design
and implementation outside academia.[59]

Features

A language provides features for the programmer for develop software. Some notable features are
described below.

Type system

A data type is a set of allowable values and operations that can be performed on these values.[60]
Each programming language's type system defines which data types exist, the type of an
expression, and how type equivalence and type compatibility function in the language.[61]

According to type theory, a language is fully typed if the specification of every operation defines
types of data to which the operation is applicable.[62] In contrast, an untyped language, such as
most assembly languages, allows any operation to be performed on any data, generally sequences
of bits of various lengths.[62] In practice, while few languages are fully typed, most offer a degree of
typing.[62]

Because different types (such as integers and floats) represent values differently, unexpected
results will occur if one type is used when another is expected. Type checking will flag this error,
usually at compile time (runtime type checking is more costly).[63] With strong typing, type errors
can always be detected unless variables are explicitly cast to a different type. Weak typing occurs
when languages allow implicit casting—for example, to enable operations between variables of
different types without the programmer making an explicit type conversion. The more cases in
which this type coercion is allowed, the fewer type errors can be detected.[64]
Commonly supported types

Early programming languages often supported only built-in, numeric types such as the integer
(signed and unsigned) and floating point (to support operations on real numbers that are not
integers). Most programming languages support multiple sizes of floats (often called float and
double) and integers depending on the size and precision required by the programmer. Storing an
integer in a type that is too small to represent it leads to integer overflow. The most common way of
representing negative numbers with signed types is twos complement, although ones complement
is also used.[65] Other common types include Boolean—which is either true or false—and character—
traditionally one byte, sufficient to represent all ASCII characters.[66]

Arrays are a data type whose elements, in many languages, must consist of a single type of fixed
length. Other languages define arrays as references to data stored elsewhere and support elements
of varying types.[67] Depending on the programming language, sequences of multiple characters,
called strings, may be supported as arrays of characters or their own primitive type.[68] Strings may
be of fixed or variable length, which enables greater flexibility at the cost of increased storage space
and more complexity.[69] Other data types that may be supported include lists,[70] associative
(unordered) arrays accessed via keys,[71] records in which data is mapped to names in an ordered
structure,[72] and tuples—similar to records but without names for data fields.[73] Pointers store
memory addresses, typically referencing locations on the heap where other data is stored.[74]

The simplest user-defined type is an ordinal type, often called an enumeration, whose values can be
mapped onto the set of positive integers.[75] Since the mid-1980s, most programming languages
also support abstract data types, in which the representation of the data and operations are hidden
from the user, who can only access an interface.[76] The benefits of data abstraction can include
increased reliability, reduced complexity, less potential for name collision, and allowing the
underlying data structure to be changed without the client needing to alter its code.[77]

Static and dynamic typing

In static typing, all expressions have their types determined before a program executes, typically at
compile-time.[62] Most widely used, statically typed programming languages require the types of
variables to be specified explicitly. In some languages, types are implicit; one form of this is when
the compiler can infer types based on context. The downside of implicit typing is the potential for
errors to go undetected.[78] Complete type inference has traditionally been associated with
functional languages such as Haskell and ML.[79]

With dynamic typing, the type is not attached to the variable but only the value encoded in it. A
single variable can be reused for a value of a different type. Although this provides more flexibility to
the programmer, it is at the cost of lower reliability and less ability for the programming language to
check for errors.[80] Some languages allow variables of a union type to which any type of value can
be assigned, in an exception to their usual static typing rules.[81]

Concurrency

In computing, multiple instructions can be executed simultaneously. Many programming languages

support instruction-level and subprogram-level concurrency.[82] By the twenty-first century,
additional processing power on computers was increasingly coming from the use of additional
processors, which requires programmers to design software that makes use of multiple processors
simultaneously to achieve improved performance.[83] Interpreted languages such as Python and
Ruby do not support the concurrent use of multiple processors.[84] Other programming languages
do support managing data shared between different threads by controlling the order of execution of
key instructions via the use of semaphores, controlling access to shared data via monitor, or
enabling message passing between threads.[85]

Exception handling

Many programming languages include exception handlers, a section of code triggered by runtime
errors that can deal with them in two main ways:[86]

Termination: shutting down and handing over control to the operating system. This option is
considered the simplest.

Resumption: resuming the program near where the exception occurred. This can trigger a repeat
of the exception, unless the exception handler is able to modify values to prevent the exception
from reoccurring.

Some programming languages support dedicating a block of code to run regardless of whether an
exception occurs before the code is reached; this is called finalization.[87]

There is a tradeoff between increased ability to handle exceptions and reduced performance.[88] For
example, even though array index errors are common[89] C does not check them for performance
reasons.[88] Although programmers can write code to catch user-defined exceptions, this can clutter
a program. Standard libraries in some languages, such as C, use their return values to indicate an
exception.[90] Some languages and their compilers have the option of turning on and off error
handling capability, either temporarily or permanently.[91]
Design and implementation

One of the most important influences on programming language design has been computer
architecture. Imperative languages, the most commonly used type, were designed to perform well
on von Neumann architecture, the most common computer architecture.[92] In von Neumann
architecture, the memory stores both data and instructions, while the CPU that performs
instructions on data is separate, and data must be piped back and forth to the CPU. The central
elements in these languages are variables, assignment, and iteration, which is more efficient than
recursion on these machines.[93]

Many programming languages have been designed from scratch, altered to meet new needs, and
combined with other languages. Many have eventually fallen into disuse. The birth of programming
languages in the 1950s was stimulated by the desire to make a universal programming language
suitable for all machines and uses, avoiding the need to write code for different computers.[94] By
the early 1960s, the idea of a universal language was rejected due to the differing requirements of
the variety of purposes for which code was written.[95]

Tradeoffs

Desirable qualities of programming languages include readability, writability, and reliability.[96] These
features can reduce the cost of training programmers in a language, the amount of time needed to
write and maintain programs in the language, the cost of compiling the code, and increase runtime
performance.[97]

Although early programming languages often prioritized efficiency over readability, the latter has
grown in importance since the 1970s. Having multiple operations to achieve the same result can
be detrimental to readability, as is overloading operators, so that the same operator can have
multiple meanings.[98] Another feature important to readability is orthogonality, limiting the
number of constructs that a programmer has to learn.[99] A syntax structure that is easily
understood and special words that are immediately obvious also supports readability.[100]

Writability is the ease of use for writing code to solve the desired problem. Along with the same
features essential for readability,[101] abstraction—interfaces that enable hiding details from the
client—and expressivity—enabling more concise programs—additionally help the programmer
write code.[102] The earliest programming languages were tied very closely to the underlying
hardware of the computer, but over time support for abstraction has increased, allowing
programmers to express ideas that are more remote from simple translation into underlying
 hardware instructions. Because programmers are less tied to the complexity of the computer,
their programs can do more computing with less effort from the programmer.[103] Most
programming languages come with a standard library of commonly used functions.[104]

Reliability means that a program performs as specified in a wide range of circumstances.[105]

Type checking, exception handling, and restricted aliasing (multiple variable names accessing the
same region of memory) all can improve a program's reliability.[106]

Programming language design often involves tradeoffs.[107] For example, features to improve
reliability typically come at the cost of performance.[108] Increased expressivity due to a large
number of operators makes writing code easier but comes at the cost of readability.[108]

Natural-language programming has been proposed as a way to eliminate the need for a specialized
language for programming. However, this goal remains distant and its benefits are open to debate.
Edsger W. Dijkstra took the position that the use of a formal language is essential to prevent the
introduction of meaningless constructs.[109] Alan Perlis was similarly dismissive of the idea.[110]

Specification

The specification of a programming language is an artifact that the language users and the
implementors can use to agree upon whether a piece of source code is a valid program in that
language, and if so what its behavior shall be.

A programming language specification can take several forms, including the following:

An explicit definition of the syntax, static semantics, and execution semantics of the language.
While syntax is commonly specified using a formal grammar, semantic definitions may be written
in natural language (e.g., as in the C language), or a formal semantics (e.g., as in Standard ML[111]
and Scheme[112] specifications).

A description of the behavior of a translator for the language (e.g., the C++ and Fortran
specifications). The syntax and semantics of the language have to be inferred from this
description, which may be written in natural or formal language.

A reference or model implementation, sometimes written in the language being specified (e.g.,
Prolog or ANSI REXX[113]). The syntax and semantics of the language are explicit in the behavior
of the reference implementation.
Implementation

An implementation of a programming language is the conversion of a program into machine code

that can be executed by the hardware. The machine code then can be executed with the help of the
operating system.[114] The most common form of interpretation in production code is by a compiler,
which translates the source code via an intermediate-level language into machine code, known as
an executable. Once the program is compiled, it will run more quickly than with other
implementation methods.[115] Some compilers are able to provide further optimization to reduce
memory or computation usage when the executable runs, but increasing compilation time.[116]

Another implementation method is to run the program with an interpreter, which translates each line
of software into machine code just before it executes. Although it can make debugging easier, the
downside of interpretation is that it runs 10 to 100 times slower than a compiled executable.[117]
Hybrid interpretation methods provide some of the benefits of compilation and some of the benefits
of interpretation via partial compilation. One form this takes is just-in-time compilation, in which the
software is compiled ahead of time into an intermediate language, and then into machine code
immediately before execution.[118]

Proprietary languages

Although most of the most commonly used programming languages have fully open specifications
and implementations, many programming languages exist only as proprietary programming
languages with the implementation available only from a single vendor, which may claim that such a
proprietary language is their intellectual property. Proprietary programming languages are
commonly domain-specific languages or internal scripting languages for a single product; some
proprietary languages are used only internally within a vendor, while others are available to external
users.

Some programming languages exist on the border between proprietary and open; for example,
Oracle Corporation asserts proprietary rights to some aspects of the Java programming
language,[119] and Microsoft's C# programming language, which has open implementations of most
parts of the system, also has Common Language Runtime (CLR) as a closed environment.[120]

Many proprietary languages are widely used, in spite of their proprietary nature; examples include
MATLAB, VBScript, and Wolfram Language. Some languages may make the transition from closed
to open; for example, Erlang was originally Ericsson's internal programming language.[121]
Open source programming languages are particularly helpful for open science applications,
enhancing the capacity for replication and code sharing.[122]

Use

Thousands of different programming languages have been created, mainly in the computing
field.[123] Individual software projects commonly use five programming languages or more.[124]

Programming languages differ from most other forms of human expression in that they require a
greater degree of precision and completeness. When using a natural language to communicate with
other people, human authors and speakers can be ambiguous and make small errors, and still
expect their intent to be understood. However, figuratively speaking, computers "do exactly what
they are told to do", and cannot "understand" what code the programmer intended to write. The
combination of the language definition, a program, and the program's inputs must fully specify the
external behavior that occurs when the program is executed, within the domain of control of that
program. On the other hand, ideas about an algorithm can be communicated to humans without the
precision required for execution by using pseudocode, which interleaves natural language with code
written in a programming language.

A programming language provides a structured mechanism for defining pieces of data, and the
operations or transformations that may be carried out automatically on that data. A programmer
uses the abstractions present in the language to represent the concepts involved in a computation.
These concepts are represented as a collection of the simplest elements available (called
primitives).[125] Programming is the process by which programmers combine these primitives to
compose new programs, or adapt existing ones to new uses or a changing environment.

Programs for a computer might be executed in a batch process without any human interaction, or a
user might type commands in an interactive session of an interpreter. In this case the "commands"
are simply programs, whose execution is chained together. When a language can run its commands
through an interpreter (such as a Unix shell or other command-line interface), without compiling, it is
called a scripting language.[126]

Measuring language usage

Determining which is the most widely used programming language is difficult since the definition of
usage varies by context. One language may occupy the greater number of programmer hours, a
different one has more lines of code, and a third may consume the most CPU time. Some languages
are very popular for particular kinds of applications. For example, COBOL is still strong in the
corporate data center, often on large mainframes;[127][128] Fortran in scientific and engineering
applications; Ada in aerospace, transportation, military, real-time, and embedded applications; and C
in embedded applications and operating systems. Other languages are regularly used to write many
different kinds of applications.

Various methods of measuring language popularity, each subject to a different bias over what is
measured, have been proposed:

counting the number of job advertisements that mention the language[129]

the number of books sold that teach or describe the language[130]

estimates of the number of existing lines of code written in the language – which may
underestimate languages not often found in public searches[131]

counts of language references (i.e., to the name of the language) found using a web search
engine.

Combining and averaging information from various internet sites, [Link] reported the ten
most popular programming languages (in descending order by overall popularity): Java, C, C++,
Python, C#, JavaScript, VB .NET, R, PHP, and MATLAB.[132]

As of June 2024, the top five programming languages as measured by TIOBE index are Python, C++,
C, Java and C#. TIOBE provides a list of top 100 programming languages according to popularity
and update this list every month.[133]

According to IEEE Spectrum staff, today's most popular programming languages may remain
dominant because of how AI works. As a result, new languages will have a harder time gaining
popularity since coders will not write many programs in them.[134]

Dialects, flavors and implementations

A dialect of a programming language or a data exchange language is a (relatively small) variation or

extension of the language that does not change its intrinsic nature. With languages such as Scheme
and Forth, standards may be considered insufficient, inadequate, or illegitimate by implementors, so
often they will deviate from the standard, making a new dialect. In other cases, a dialect is created
for use in a domain-specific language, often a subset. In the Lisp world, most languages that use
basic S-expression syntax and Lisp-like semantics are considered Lisp dialects, although they vary
wildly as do, say, Racket and Clojure. As it is common for one language to have several dialects, it
can become quite difficult for an inexperienced programmer to find the right documentation. The
BASIC language has many dialects.

Classifications

Programming languages can be described per the following high-level yet sometimes overlapping
classifications:[135]

Imperative

An imperative programming language supports implementing logic encoded as a sequence of

ordered operations. Most popularly used languages are classified as imperative.[136]

Functional

A functional programming language supports successively applying functions to the given

parameters. Although appreciated by many researchers for their simplicity and elegance, problems
with efficiency have prevented them from being widely adopted.[137]

Logic

A logic programming language is designed so that the software, rather than the programmer,
decides what order in which the instructions are executed.[138]

Object-oriented

Object-oriented programming (OOP) is characterized by features such as data abstraction,

inheritance, and dynamic dispatch. OOP is supported by most popular imperative languages and
some functional languages.[136]

Markup

Although a markup language is not a programming language per se, it might support integration
with a programming language.

Special

There are special-purpose languages that are not easily compared to other programming
languages.[139]

See also

Comparison of programming languages (basic instructions) Computer programming

portal
Comparison of programming languages
Computer programming

Computer science and Outline of computer science

Domain-specific language

Domain-specific modeling

Educational programming language

Esoteric programming language

Extensible programming

Category:Extensible syntax programming languages

Invariant-based programming

List of BASIC dialects

List of open-source programming languages

Lists of programming languages

List of programming language researchers

Programming languages used in most popular websites

Language-oriented programming

Logic programming

Literate programming

Metalanguage

Metaprogramming
Ruby (programming language) § Metaprogramming

Modeling language

Programming language theory

Pseudocode

Rebol § Dialects

Reflective programming

Scientific programming language

Scripting language
 Semantics (logic)

Syntax (logic)

Software engineering and List of software engineering topics

References

1. Information technology — Vocabulary ([Link] .

2. Sebesta, Robert W. (2023). Concepts of Programming Languages (12th global ed.). Pearson.
pp. 46–51. ISBN 978-1-292-43682-1.

3. Sebesta, Robert (2022). Concepts of Programming Languages: Global Edition (12th global ed.).
Harlow: Pearson. p. 41. ISBN 978-1-292-43682-1.

4. Chauhan, Sharad (2013). "10". Programming Languages - Design and Constructs ([Link]
[Link]/books/edition/Programming_Languages_Design_and_Constru/qKRnohkDbb0C?hl
=en&gbpv=0) . University Science Press. p. 235. ISBN 978-93-81159-41-5. Retrieved
10 September 2025. "Like our natural languages, programming languages facilitate the
expression and communication between people. However, programming languages differ from
natural languages in two ways. First, programming languages also enables communication of
ideas between people and computing machines. Second, programming languages have a
narrower expressive domain than our natural languages. That is, they facilitate only the
communication of computational ideas."

5. Robert A. Edmunds, The Prentice-Hall standard glossary of computer terminology, Prentice-

Hall, 1985, p. 91

6. Pascal Lando, Anne Lapujade, Gilles Kassel, and Frédéric Fürst, Towards a General Ontology of
Computer Programs ([Link]
f) Archived ([Link]
te-ic/site/IMG/pdf/ICSOFT2007_final.pdf) 7 July 2015 at the Wayback Machine, ICSOFT
2007 ([Link] Archived ([Link]
[Link]/web/20100427063709/[Link] 27
April 2010 at the Wayback Machine, pp. 163–170
 7. R. Narasimhan, Programming Languages and Computers: A Unified Metatheory, pp. 189—247
in Franz Alt, Morris Rubinoff (eds.) Advances in computers, Volume 8, Academic Press, 1994,
ISBN 0-12-012108-5, p.215: "[...] the model [...] for computer languages differs from that [...] for
programming languages in only two respects. In a computer language, there are only finitely
many names—or registers—which can assume only finitely many values—or states—and these
states are not further distinguished in terms of any other attributes. [author's footnote:] This
may sound like a truism but its implications are far-reaching. For example, it would imply that
any model for programming languages, by fixing certain of its parameters or features, should
be reducible in a natural way to a model for computer languages."

8. John C. Reynolds, "Some thoughts on teaching programming and programming languages",

SIGPLAN Notices, Volume 43, Issue 11, November 2008, p.109

9. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 519.

10. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, pp. 520–521.

11. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 521.

12. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 522.

13. Sebesta 2012, p. 42.

14. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 524.

15. Sebesta 2012, pp. 42–44.

16. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, pp. 523–524.

17. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 527.

18. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 528.

19. "How Lisp Became God's Own Programming Language" ([Link]

[Link]) . [Link]. Archived ([Link]
s://[Link]/2018/10/14/[Link]) from the original on 10 April 2024. Retrieved
10 April 2024.

20. Sebesta 2012, pp. 47–48.

21. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 526.

22. Sebesta 2012, p. 50.

23. Sebesta 2012, pp. 701–703.

24. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, pp. 524–525.

25. Sebesta 2012, pp. 56–57.

26. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 525.

27. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, pp. 526–527.

28. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 531.

29. Sebesta 2012, p. 79.

30. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 530.

31. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, pp. 532–533.

32. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 534.

33. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, pp. 534–535.

34. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 535.

35. Sebesta 2012, p. 736.

36. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 536.

37. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, pp. 536–537.

38. Sebesta 2012, pp. 91–92.

39. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, pp. 538–539.

40. Sebesta 2012, pp. 97–99.

41. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 542.

42. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, pp. 474–475, 477, 542.

43. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, pp. 542–543.

44. Gabbrielli & Martini 2023, p. 544.

45. Bezanson, Jeff; Karpinski, Stefan; Shah, Viral B.; Edelman, Alan (2012). "Julia: A Fast Dynamic
Language for Technical Computing". arXiv:1209.5145 ([Link]
[[Link] ([Link] ].

46. Ayouni, M. and Ayouni, M., 2020. Data Types in Ring. Beginning Ring Programming: From
Novice to Professional, pp.51-98.

47. Sáez-López, J.M., Román-González, M. and Vázquez-Cano, E., 2016. Visual programming
languages integrated across the curriculum in elementary school: A two year case study using
"Scratch" in five schools. Computers & Education, 97, pp.129-141.
48. Fayed, M.S., Al-Qurishi, M., Alamri, A. and Al-Daraiseh, A.A., 2017, March. PWCT: visual
language for IoT and cloud computing applications and systems. In Proceedings of the Second
International Conference on Internet of things, Data and Cloud Computing (pp. 1-5).

49. Kodosky, J., 2020. LabVIEW. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages, 4(HOPL),
pp.1-54.

50. Fernando, A. and Warusawithana, L., 2020. Beginning Ballerina Programming: From Novice to
Professional. Apress.

51. Baluprithviraj, K.N., Bharathi, K.R., Chendhuran, S. and Lokeshwaran, P., 2021, March. Artificial
intelligence based smart door with face mask detection. In 2021 International Conference on
Artificial Intelligence and Smart Systems (ICAIS) (pp. 543-548). IEEE.

52. Sewell, B., 2015. Blueprints visual scripting for unreal engine. Packt Publishing Ltd.

53. Bertolini, L., 2018. Hands-On Game Development without Coding: Create 2D and 3D games
with Visual Scripting in Unity. Packt Publishing Ltd.

54. Michael Sipser (1996). Introduction to the Theory of Computation. PWS Publishing. ISBN 978-0-
534-94728-6. Section 2.2: Pushdown Automata, pp.101–114.

55. Jeffrey Kegler, "Perl and Undecidability ([Link]

bility) Archived ([Link]
m/Home/perl-and-undecidability) 17 August 2009 at the Wayback Machine", The Perl Review.
Papers 2 and 3 prove, using respectively Rice's theorem and direct reduction to the halting
problem, that the parsing of Perl programs is in general undecidable.

56. Marty Hall, 1995, Lecture Notes: Macros ([Link]

ml) Archived ([Link]
isp-Notes/[Link]) 6 August 2013 at the Wayback Machine, PostScript version ([Link]
[Link]/~hall/Lisp-Notes/[Link]) Archived ([Link]
17211709/[Link] 17 August 2000 at the
Wayback Machine

57. Aaby, Anthony (2004). Introduction to Programming Languages ([Link]

0121108043216/[Link] .
Archived from the original ([Link]
[Link]) on 8 November 2012. Retrieved 29 September 2012.

58. Michael Lee Scott, Programming language pragmatics, Edition 2, Morgan Kaufmann, 2006,
ISBN 0-12-633951-1, p. 18–19
59. Winskel, Glynn (5 February 1993). The Formal Semantics of Programming Languages: An
Introduction ([Link] . MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-
262-73103-4.

60. Sebesta 2012, p. 244.

61. Sebesta 2012, p. 245.

62. Andrew Cooke. "Introduction To Computer Languages" ([Link]

l) . Archived ([Link]
[Link]) from the original on 15 August 2012. Retrieved 13 July 2012.

63. Sebesta 2012, pp. 15, 408–409.

64. Sebesta 2012, pp. 303–304.

65. Sebesta 2012, pp. 246–247.

66. Sebesta 2012, p. 249.

67. Sebesta 2012, p. 260.

68. Sebesta 2012, p. 250.

69. Sebesta 2012, p. 254.

70. Sebesta 2012, pp. 281–282.

71. Sebesta 2012, pp. 272–273.

72. Sebesta 2012, pp. 276–277.

73. Sebesta 2012, p. 280.

74. Sebesta 2012, pp. 289–290.

75. Sebesta 2012, p. 255.

76. Sebesta 2012, pp. 244–245.

77. Sebesta 2012, p. 477.

78. Sebesta 2012, p. 211.

79. Leivant, Daniel (1983). Polymorphic type inference. ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on
Principles of programming languages. Austin, Texas: ACM Press. pp. 88–98.
doi:10.1145/567067.567077 ([Link] . ISBN 978-0-
89791-090-3.

80. Sebesta 2012, pp. 212–213.

 81. Sebesta 2012, pp. 284–285.

82. Sebesta 2012, p. 576.

83. Sebesta 2012, p. 579.

84. Sebesta 2012, p. 585.

85. Sebesta 2012, pp. 585–586.

86. Sebesta 2012, pp. 630, 634.

87. Sebesta 2012, p. 635.

88. Sebesta 2012, p. 631.

89. Sebesta 2012, p. 261.

90. Sebesta 2012, p. 632.

91. Sebesta 2012, pp. 631, 635–636.

92. Sebesta 2012, p. 18.

93. Sebesta 2012, p. 19.

94. Nofre, Priestley & Alberts 2014, p. 55.

95. Nofre, Priestley & Alberts 2014, p. 60.

96. Sebesta 2012, p. 8.

97. Sebesta 2012, pp. 16–17.

98. Sebesta 2012, pp. 8–9.

99. Sebesta 2012, pp. 9–10.

100. Sebesta 2012, pp. 12–13.

101. Sebesta 2012, p. 13.

102. Sebesta 2012, pp. 14–15.

103. Frederick P. Brooks, Jr.: The Mythical Man-Month, Addison-Wesley, 1982, pp. 93–94

104. Busbee, Kenneth Leroy; Braunschweig, Dave (15 December 2018). "Standard Libraries" (https://
[Link]/programmingfundamentals/chapter/standard-libraries/) .
Programming Fundamentals – A Modular Structured Approach. Retrieved 27 January 2024.

105. Sebesta 2012, p. 15.

106. Sebesta 2012, pp. 8, 16.

107. Sebesta 2012, pp. 18, 23.

108. Sebesta 2012, p. 23.

109. Dijkstra, Edsger W. On the foolishness of "natural language programming." ([Link]

[Link]/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD06xx/[Link]) Archived ([Link]
g/web/20080120201526/[Link]
[Link]) 20 January 2008 at the Wayback Machine EWD667.

110. Perlis, Alan (September 1982). "Epigrams on Programming" ([Link]

[Link]/users/klaeren/[Link]) . SIGPLAN Notices Vol. 17, No. 9. pp. 7–13. Archived
([Link]
ers/klaeren/[Link]) from the original on 17 January 1999.

111. Milner, R.; M. Tofte; R. Harper; D. MacQueen (1997). The Definition of Standard ML (Revised).
MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-63181-5.

112. Kelsey, Richard; William Clinger; Jonathan Rees (February 1998). "Section 7.2 Formal
semantics" ([Link]
#%_sec_7.2) . Revised5 Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme. Archived ([Link]
[Link]/web/20060706081110/[Link]
L/[Link]#%_sec_7.2) from the original on 6 July 2006.

113. ANSI – Programming Language Rexx, X3-274.1996

114. Sebesta 2012, pp. 23–24.

115. Sebesta 2012, pp. 25–27.

116. Sebesta 2012, p. 27.

117. Sebesta 2012, p. 28.

118. Sebesta 2012, pp. 29–30.

119. See: Oracle America, Inc. v. Google, Inc.

120. "Guide to Programming Languages | [Link]" ([Link]

g/resources/computer-programming-languages/) . [Link]. Archived ([Link]
[Link]/web/20180513223729/[Link]
-programming-languages/) from the original on 13 May 2018. Retrieved 13 May 2018.
121. "The basics" ([Link] .
[Link]. 10 May 2011. Archived ([Link]
[Link]/developerworks/library/os-erlang1/[Link]) from the original on 14 May 2018.
Retrieved 13 May 2018.

122. Abdelaziz, Abdullah I.; Hanson, Kent A.; Gaber, Charles E.; Lee, Todd A. (2023). "Optimizing
large real-world data analysis with parquet files in R: A step-by-step tutorial" ([Link]
1002%2Fpds.5728) . Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety. 33 (3) e5728.
doi:10.1002/pds.5728 ([Link] . PMID 37984998 ([Link]
[Link]/37984998) .

123. "HOPL: an interactive Roster of Programming Languages" ([Link]

220044217/[Link] . Australia: Murdoch University. Archived from the
original ([Link] on 20 February 2011. Retrieved 1 June 2009. "This site
lists 8512 languages."

124. Mayer, Philip; Bauer, Alexander (2015). "An empirical analysis of the utilization of multiple
programming languages in open source projects". Proceedings of the 19th International
Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering. Proceedings of the 19th
International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering – EASE '15.
New York, NY, US: ACM. pp. 4:1–4:10. doi:10.1145/2745802.2745805 ([Link]
5%2F2745802.2745805) . ISBN 978-1-4503-3350-4. "Results: We found (a) a mean number of
5 languages per project with a clearly dominant main general-purpose language and 5 often-
used DSL types, (b) a significant influence of the size, number of commits, and the main
language on the number of languages as well as no significant influence of age and number of
contributors, and (c) three language ecosystems grouped around XML, Shell/Make, and
HTML/CSS. Conclusions: Multi-language programming seems to be common in open-source
projects and is a factor that must be dealt with in tooling and when assessing the development
and maintenance of such software systems."

125. Abelson, Sussman, and Sussman. "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" (http
s://[Link]/web/20090226050622/[Link]
-[Link]) . Archived from the original ([Link]
[Link]) on 26 February 2009. Retrieved 3 March 2009.

126. Vicki, Brown; Morin, Rich (1999). "Scripting Languages" ([Link]

ctech/Vol.15/15.09/ScriptingLanguages/[Link]) . MacTech. Archived ([Link]
[Link]/web/20171202235828/[Link]
ngLanguages/[Link]) from the original on 2 December 2017.
127. Georgina Swan (21 September 2009). "COBOL turns 50" ([Link]
19181128/[Link] .
Computerworld. Archived from the original ([Link]
9/cobol_turns_50/) on 19 October 2013. Retrieved 19 October 2013.

128. Ed Airey (3 May 2012). "7 Myths of COBOL Debunked" ([Link]

-[Link]) . [Link]. Archived ([Link]
31019171802/[Link] from
the original on 19 October 2013. Retrieved 19 October 2013.

129. Nicholas Enticknap. "SSL/Computer Weekly IT salary survey: finance boom drives IT job
growth" ([Link]
[Link]) . Computer Weekly. Archived ([Link]
[Link]/web/20111026035734/[Link]
1/[Link]) from the original on
26 October 2011. Retrieved 14 June 2013.

130. "Counting programming languages by book sales" ([Link]

127/[Link] .
[Link]. 2 August 2006. Archived from the original ([Link]
2006/08/programming_language_trends_1.html) on 17 May 2008.

131. Bieman, J.M.; Murdock, V., Finding code on the World Wide Web: a preliminary investigation,
Proceedings First IEEE International Workshop on Source Code Analysis and Manipulation,
2001

132. "Most Popular and Influential Programming Languages of 2018" ([Link]

programming-languages-2018/) . [Link]. 18 December 2017. Archived ([Link]
[Link]/web/20180830004924/[Link]
8/) from the original on 30 August 2018. Retrieved 29 August 2018.

133. "TIOBE Index" ([Link] . Retrieved 24 June 2024.

134. "IEEE Spectrum" ([Link] . Retrieved

25 September 2025.

135. Sebesta 2012, p. 21.

136. Sebesta 2012, pp. 21–22.

137. Sebesta 2012, p. 12.

138. Sebesta 2012, p. 22.

139. Sebesta 2012, pp. 22–23.

Further reading

Abelson, Harold; Sussman, Gerald Jay (1996). Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
([Link]
[Link]) (2nd ed.). MIT Press. Archived from the original ([Link]
ext/book/[Link]) on 9 March 2018.

Raphael Finkel: Advanced Programming Language Design ([Link]

41742/[Link] , Addison Wesley 1995.

Daniel P. Friedman, Mitchell Wand, Christopher T. Haynes: Essentials of Programming Languages,

The MIT Press 2001.

David Gelernter, Suresh Jagannathan: Programming Linguistics, The MIT Press 1990.

Ellis Horowitz (ed.): Programming Languages, a Grand Tour (3rd ed.), 1987.

Ellis Horowitz: Fundamentals of Programming Languages, 1989.

Shriram Krishnamurthi: Programming Languages: Application and Interpretation, online publication

([Link] Archived ([Link]
[Link]/web/20210430210417/[Link]
30 April 2021 at the Wayback Machine.

Gabbrielli, Maurizio; Martini, Simone (2023). Programming Languages: Principles and Paradigms
(2nd ed.). Springer. ISBN 978-3-031-34144-1.

Bruce J. MacLennan: Principles of Programming Languages: Design, Evaluation, and

Implementation, Oxford University Press 1999.

John C. Mitchell: Concepts in Programming Languages, Cambridge University Press 2002.

Nofre, David; Priestley, Mark; Alberts, Gerard (2014). "When Technology Became Language: The
Origins of the Linguistic Conception of Computer Programming, 1950–1960". Technology and
Culture. 55 (1): 40–75. doi:10.1353/tech.2014.0031 ([Link]
1) . ISSN 0040-165X ([Link] . JSTOR 24468397 (https://
[Link]/stable/24468397) . PMID 24988794 ([Link]
4) .

Benjamin C. Pierce: Types and Programming Languages, The MIT Press 2002.
Terrence W. Pratt and Marvin Victor Zelkowitz: Programming Languages: Design and
Implementation (4th ed.), Prentice Hall 2000.

Peter H. Salus. Handbook of Programming Languages (4 vols.). Macmillan 1998.

Ravi Sethi: Programming Languages: Concepts and Constructs, 2nd ed., Addison-Wesley 1996.

Michael L. Scott and Jonathan Aldrich: Programming Language Pragmatics, 5th ed., Morgan
Kaufmann Publishers 2025.

Sebesta, Robert W. (2012). Concepts of Programming Languages (10 ed.). Addison-Wesley.

ISBN 978-0-13-139531-2.

Franklyn Turbak and David Gifford with Mark Sheldon: Design Concepts in Programming
Languages, The MIT Press 2009.

Peter Van Roy and Seif Haridi. Concepts, Techniques, and Models of Computer Programming, The
MIT Press 2004.

David A. Watt. Programming Language Concepts and Paradigms. Prentice Hall 1990.

David A. Watt and Muffy Thomas. Programming Language Syntax and Semantics. Prentice Hall
1991.

David A. Watt. Programming Language Processors. Prentice Hall 1993.

David A. Watt. Programming Language Design Concepts. John Wiley & Sons 2004.

Wilson, Leslie B. (2001). Comparative Programming Languages, Third Edition. Addison-Wesley.

ISBN 0-201-71012-9.