

Ask HN: why does the TIOBE index omit HaXe, CoffeeScript and Vala? - ricardobeat

Neither CoffeeScript nor HaXe or Vala figure in the 2013 TIOBE index [1]. If I had to guess I'd say all of them are more widely used than most included in the &#62;50 group, and the index does feature "transpiled" languages like Dart and Fantom.<p>They claim to use search engines and other web resources to compile the listing, what could account for these missing? Are they really less common than Dart, Eiffel, Gambas, Dylan, etc?<p>[1] http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html
======
ricardobeat
Clickable:
[http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index....](http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html)

For comparison here is data from ohloh:
[http://www.ohloh.net/languages/compare?measure=commits&p...](http://www.ohloh.net/languages/compare?measure=commits&percent=true&l0=ada&l1=coffeescript&l2=erlang&l3=vala&l4=-1&commit=Update)

------
eduardchil
Probably because they are trans compiled languages. Fantom also runs on the
JVM and the CLR. Dart can run directly in Chrome.

~~~
ricardobeat
Dart only runs in a specialized version of Chrome, and I assume they don't
discern between code being transpiled or ran in a VM for Fantom/Clojure and
others, so what would be the point? A bytecode compiler for the JVM could be
written for any of these languages.

