17 Jun
2026
17 Jun
'26
2:24 p.m.
On Wed, 17 Jun 2026, Doug Jackson wrote:
I cannot help but find this discussion of "dead
languages" fascinating,
particularly in the context of a Classic Computer mailing list.
A language is not dead simply because somebody has not heard of it. Nor is
it dead because the latest Python, JavaScript, or Ruby programmer has never
encountered it. By that measure, half of computing history would vanish
every few years.
There is an enormous distinction between actually being dead, VS being
CALLED "dead" by those who are simply ignorant of it.
THAT is what I was saying the message that you quoted.
On Wed, 17 Jun 2026 at 15:13, Fred Cisin via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
wrote:
> For a languageto get CALLED "dead" does not require any of those objective
> criteria. It gets called dead if somebody hasn't heard anything about it
> in a long time.
>
> Somebody who hasn't heard anything about mainframes in years thinks that
> mainframes are dead.
> Somebody who hasn't heard anything about COBOL in years thinks that
> COBOL is dead.
>
> Most stuff being called "dead" is not by objective criteria; it just
> hasn't been talked about much lately. Among THAT person's social circle.
>
>
> I agree with most of your objective criteria, except lack of recent
> update. While it is true that most active languages get frequent updates,
> but that isn't requisite for not being dead.
> Should we say that a person is dead if they haven't been to the doctor in
> 10 (25, 50) years? It would call for a wellness check, but hardly an
> assumption of demise.
> Recently some AI generated facebook post recounted Cliff Stoll's famous
> tracking down of intruders. The same article said that Cliff died in May
> 2024. Cliff says that the news of his death is slightly exaggerated.
>
> --
> Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com