Had to put my in for Haskell, Simple yet, erm.... functional!

I'm used to doing things in Java and since it's fairly cross-platform, I voted for that. Python is getting better though and the syntax is easier to read in some ways.

Of course, I can't wait for Java 1.7.

C++ was my pick. All other languages seem to specialise to much next to it.

Though I would like to see what would happen if you made a reduced form of the POSIX C libs with C++ syntax, replacing the FILE struct with a Java-esq hybrid of that and C++'s string and alot of the more usefull C++ and Java class's added in as well (all made smaller with only as many functions as absolutly needed of course).

Any one have hints on how to build something taht insane (other than not to). I even have a name XISOP!

C++ is C + OOP.

That is not correct, but not completely wrong either. It is not a very good definition nonetheless. C has some limited support to object-oriented programming approach and in the way you put it, makes it look like C has no support at all to OOP.

C++ = C + extensions

Now that definition is a good one . Was I being too picky? Sorry

Oh yeah, I am voting for Java. It usually pays the bills, although I am secretly moving to python at home for my programming needs

Where's BASH ?

What about good old Pascal ??

I'm going to vote for Smalltalk for no other reason than I wrote a compiler for it in 2007. Well, it's a cool language, too.

Really though, look at the milestones: there was a new version of Ruby, new MAJOR versions of Perl and Python are on the horizon, Erlang had a major new book published (with another one in the works), and Haskell has seen pretty good growth (as well as being the foundation of a Perl6 implementation). Exciting times for language enthusiasts!

just a question. I have been programming in c++ for a while, and tried java. I really did not like it. What do you people like about it so much? I just dont get it.

short circuit: Most of my views about Java can be summarised pretty well by this article I read just today. It's nice for some things, but the kind of "one-size-fits-all" aura that surrounds it I think is unwarranted of any programming language.

That is a pretty biased article if you ask me. It says more about CS departments than about Java itself. Students tend to become too graphically oriented? Uhm, sorry, I am self-taught and I can assure you that most Java books do not introduce GUIs until the very end of what are often 1500 page books. Or again, the Deitel book - which is more graphically oriented - does manage to show how to write a compiler for a virtual machine. Students rely too easily on borrowed classes and libraries? Not if they are taught the proper way. All of the advantages of C++ (with the exception of pointers) that are mentioned can easily be taught in a java course and, in fact, if you take books like those written by Eckel or Horton, you can be sure that they are. In the end, yes, Java is not the language of choice for the system engineer - but then again, how many CS graduates go into systems programming? I would think that Java does have a proper right to be considered the primary language and that C and C++ should be reserved for upper-level specialization.

Python has the mojo now.