List of 4,248 open source programming languages

The title is misleading. The list is about languages, of any kind, no matter if open source or not, or even if related to computing or not.<p>So much so that some entries that initially appeared weird to me are:<p>- morse code<p>- arezzo notation (a musical notation system)<p>- Balanced ternary<p>Then you look better... and you realize it&#x27;s about languages in general, not about open source or programming at all.

They aren&#x27;t consistently open source or programming languages (only categories “pl” and “esolang” seem to be programming languages.)<p>It&#x27;s a list of...things.

I like how comprehensive this is. Some of these are super obscure, including some systems that seem to only be referenced in a scholastic paper.<p>I don&#x27;t like how disorganized&#x2F;mis-characterized this is. As others have pointed out, there is little mention of open source (have to go into the language page for that), and these aren&#x27;t all programming languages. Seems like it started as such and then scope crept to include...formal languages? What is CSV even?<p>Don&#x27;t get me wrong, I think it&#x27;s awesome that there is some abstraction in which Arezzo notation, matplotlib, CSV, and a bunch of esolangs are in the same category. But saying it could benefit from focus is an understatement.<p>The website, for being as sparse and web 1.0 as it is, takes a long time to first interactive scroll on mobile.<p>I think both problems could be solved, or mitigated, by breaking it into separate lists. Programming languages, libraries, markup languages, encoding formats, and &quot;misc&quot;.

The title is misleading. I don&#x27;t see &quot;open source&quot; mentioned anywhere on this page.<p>e.g. it is very unlikely that all the Basic variants listed here are open source.

This list is very random. You can’t lump in musical notation from the year “1033” and call it programming.<p>They need to pick a theme at least, to make this useful.

Want to plug in my favourite <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;kanaka&#x2F;mal" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;kanaka&#x2F;mal</a> basically make a lisp in lot of language.<p>Really give you ther idea of what is needed in build a programming language. Soemthing won&#x27;t quite obvious. until you I down and write code. Example the ability to rewind, go back to a few earlier token.

Super cool! This list is very comprehensive and includes languages that aren’t on many other lists. I’m wondering how the author collected all of these. I’ve been building a list of programming languages posted to HN in my favorites list — it’s fun because everyone has their own idea or angle on what a programming language should look like and what features it should have.

Law: Only an idiot thinks anybody else will use their new language.<p>Corollary: All languages are created by idiots.<p>We have been very lucky that a few languages created by such idiots have turned out to be usable. I doubt the ones that happened not to fizzle would have been the best <i>a priori</i> choices, but by the Law we are lucky that any are usable at all.

It doesn&#x27;t seperate language implementations from languages.<p>And it misses 2 of 3 of mine. Which are not eso nor toy languages.

Excuse me for being an idiot, but are programming languages not...always open source? How else are you supposed to learn and use them?

It&#x27;s nice, but there are no tags for compiled&#x2F;interpreted&#x2F;influences.

Wow, alerted by a few pull requests and then pleasantly surprised to see this here.<p>As tyingq pointed out, this is not a list of &quot;open source&quot; languages, though I don&#x27;t think it was too off for the OP to add that since indeed most of them are. It&#x27;s also a bit broader than &quot;programming languages&quot;. The list is termed &quot;computer languages&quot;. That is the main category and ~75% of the langs, but formats and other things are counted as well (see table below). Even musical notations make an appearance, as I find those relevant to people interested in designing computer languages for music, or visual languages in general. While the focus is on computer languages, I think it&#x27;s helpful to have a light touch of some of the earlier developments in language in general. So I didn&#x27;t draw explicit lines, rather the strategy is to keep focus on programming languages with a peripheral view of the bigger picture.<p><pre><code> type count pl 3096 application 111 queryLanguage 82 textMarkup 67 grammarLanguage 65 xmlFormat 61 editor 57 packageManager 56 binaryDataFormat 51 metaLanguage 50 template 49 library 40 textData 39 protocol 37 esolang 37 notation 36 assembly 34 ir 20 compiler 20 isa 18 standard 18 idl 17 schema 14 visual 14 computingMachine 13 plzoo 12 filesystem 11 framework 11 jsonFormat 11 hashFunction 10 os 10 ... </code></pre> As to accuracy, in general, there are ~420,000 cells in my &quot;spreadsheet&quot;. My initial target accuracy was ~98% or so. Gathering the cells was a mixture of manual curation, crawlers, simple NLP models, and contributions from the community.<p>This project sadly fell by the wayside. I need to decide whether to 1) abandon it and instead just contribute facts as I find them to the relevant pages on Wikipedia or 2) determine if there&#x27;s a good reason to build a fact site like this outside Wikipedia and if so get it into gear.<p>Sorry about any inaccuracies and thank you for the feedback (and especially the pull requests!).