Programmers Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional programmers interested in conceptual questions about software development. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

"... You need to understand the core language: is it algorithmic, functional, object-oriented? ..." - Effective Java, Joshua Bloch, 2ndEd. 2008. Foreword, p xiii

Functional: Lisp, OO: Java, but what is ( would Bloch mean by ) an algorithmic programming language?

share|improve this question

closed as primarily opinion-based by MichaelT, durron597, Snowman, Dan Pichelman, amon Oct 22 '15 at 13:37

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

up vote 8 down vote accepted

I assume the author want to speak about imperative programming language. A (quite complete) map of the different programming paradigms and their relationship that a language may support is available here. An important note is that a language may support (more or less well) several paradigms.

share|improve this answer
+1 I like imperative better than procedural even though they mean the same thing. It's a good point about a single language supporting more than one style. – Caleb Aug 13 '11 at 6:47
Interesting map! Thanks. – nilo de roock Aug 13 '11 at 7:30

Perhaps "procedural" is what's intended. Languages like C and Pascal, in which procedures are the main tool for structuring a program, are often called "procedural programming languages." You can think of a procedure as an implementation of an algorithm, so "algorithmic" would seem like a reasonable synonym for "procedural".

share|improve this answer

Most programming languages are algorithmic, like OO, functional, imperative and all that. The only type of languages I can think of that could be said being non-algorithmic are the reactive languages. But even the reactive languages are compiled to the algorithmic machine languages that is simulated by the reactive processor hardware, so under the hood even reactive languages are in fact algorithmic. The only way to really get away from algorithmic programming is to use processors with reactive machine language. They should be very common in the future.

share|improve this answer

protected by MichaelT Oct 21 '15 at 13:04

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.