
Hello “Hello World” - hermanradtke
https://blog.jfo.click/hello-hello-world/
======
kanobo
Sorry this is remotely tangentially related, but one of my favorite websites
to peruse when bored is this hello world collection
[http://helloworldcollection.de/](http://helloworldcollection.de/) You can
really get a feel of a language's personality and style from its 'hello world'

~~~
numlock86
It lists esoteric languages like Brainfuck, LOLCODE and Shakespeare for
example, but misses on including languages like Hello and Hello++, which were
made specifically for Hello World. Weird.

~~~
smcl
Looks like they accept contributions:

> To contribute, send your program to info@helloworldcollection.de.

The caveat is that they say they accept "real" languages only, with a link to
the wikipedia page on Turing Completeness. I don't know anything about
Hello/Hello++ and it's quite hard to search for without turning up dozens of
"how to say Hello in N languages" pages, so I've no idea if it clears this
bar.

------
ganafagol
What impresses me with this article is how accurately the lack of substance of
its title represents the lack of substance of the article itself.

This is a shockingly empty title. And the article follows suit. Some languages
are more verbose than others. Those that are more verbose often don't need to
be, unless when they do, then they do. Bummer. And if you zoom in on some
function call then you see that a one-liner is hiding more complexity too. Who
would have thought!

Such an immense waste of time that I have honestly no clue why the author went
to lengths to write this all down.

~~~
laumars
I was also confused by the lack of focus on the article. It felt like it was
an article of two halves:

1\. An example of the how printing isn’t simple and how different languages
hide that complexity in different places (though even there it gets weirdly
hung up on the difference between “scripting” and systems languages despite
the examples clearly showing the same kind of abstractions hiding the same
kind of complexities)

2\. A low level dive into the Zig programming language. This felt more like
promo piece, which is perfectly fine, but where the article stated it’s not
about Zig specifically is clearly a misrepresentation when more than 50% of
the article specifically covered the Zig compiler.

I think this would have made more sense as two articles. One as a high level
overview of how different languages handle builtins / core libraries like
‘println’, and another that is unashamedly a Zig promo piece (and there isn’t
any shame in promo pieces here because languages that aren’t sponsored by big
corps need such articles to garner developer interest).

~~~
enriquto
It seems that the first "half" is just an introduction and setting of context
for the second part. It worked out quite well for me, but I found the wording
a bit too verbose and philosophical at times.

