Talk:programming model

RFD discussion: October–November 2021
(After a little discussion on Discord with Surjection and nadando) This appears to have been blindly created based on a rather bad, vague Wikipedia article at. That article is trying (poorly) to explain that there are different models of programming: for example, you might use dependency inversion or functional programming, etc. and this choice of model is not constrained by the specific programming language you are using. That seems like sum of parts to me: it's like saying there are various models of the atom, or various psychological models of the human brain. Our definition ("the programming style where execution is done by what appears to be library calls") is little better than nonsense, and is misleading in suggesting that "THE programming model" is one specific approach among many. Actually, all the approaches are models. Equinox ◑ 23:12, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete &mdash; surjection &lang;??&rang; 23:13, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. The Wikipedia article is abysmally bad; this is worse. I assume that the definition is trying to say that the model can be reified in the form of an API, but that is a quite inessential aspect. As used on the sources cited in the ’pedia article, it is not a style but an abstraction of the computer architectures used for, with the hope of allowing one to write a parallel program in an architecture-independent way. In this sense, it is just a sum of parts; the collocation can be used for any model serving as an abstraction in programming.  --Lambiam 16:28, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 10:47, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fytcha (talk) 11:49, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, certainly what we presently have. Definition appears to be nonsense. Mihia (talk) 21:31, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Poorly defined, encyclopedic in nature. DAVilla 21:02, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Deleted. bd2412 T 07:16, 28 November 2021 (UTC)