OK, I'm going to step up to the plate and declare my ignorance. What's turing-complete mean?

Turing complete: it can solve any problem as stated as an algorithm.
(Dan Cooke, A concise introduction to computer languages, pg 9)

Thank you VERY much.

I have a three point method of grading a language.
1 point: html... etc. very simple stuff to learn.
2 point: slightly harder to learn. "scripting." I would put python, javascript, bash scripts and perl in this one.
3 point: the really "manly" ones. Java, C-whatever, etc.

Please not that most of them float between ie javascript is about 1.5, perl 2.2, etc.

I just say "I'm programming write now" not "I'm scripting at the moment" or "I'm formating some markup tags, won't be a minute"

I think that they arn't the same, but similar.

titanium_geek

To me, everything that requires to write some sort of code is programming.

Scripting is programming. Writing html is programming. Just because a language doesn't have some sort of 'advance datastructure' doesn't mean shit to me. Maybe support for that was not part of the design of the language? Ie it's purpose?

I guess the biggest reason for argument was because people miss understood what I meant. But not because it was there fault, because I didn't state myself well. I personally think there is a difference between saying "is scripting programming", and say "is a using a scripting language programming".

The point I was trying to get across: I consider designing a thought out algorithm, and implementing it, programming. I could really care less what means one uses for implementation.

I don't consider myself to be programming when I am sitting down and writing a something that automates a simple task like starting up certain programs at boot up, or writing something to enter it as a cron job.

I never meant to annoy anyone by saying Python or any other language was inferior and using it wasn't real programming. Both I, and the Python creator, consider Python to be a interpreted programming language. It is certainly the highest level language I have ever used and I have seen several people indicate it as a "very-high level language" putting it on a level above C++ or even Java.

I guess the point I was trying to make is it seams some people (at least some people who have sat in my office interviewing for a design job) think that being able to say they can write a few bash scripts and put together some HTML means they are programmers. I don't believe that to be the case. I have known plenty of people that can throw together a bash script and write large quantities of HTML but can't figure out C to save there lives because they aren't used to algorithmic programming.

I certainly can't say the same for anyone I have meant that uses Python. In general if you can write well thought out code in Python you can do the same in any other programming language so long as you have some guide on the syntax of said language.

As I have said in several of the "how do I start programming threads" before, the tools you use are way less important then your ability to solve problems with computers.

My intent certainly wasn't to insult anyone.

And yes... you CAN write object oriented code in C. But with languages like C++, Java, and Python out there, it probably isn't your best option.

all i have to add is, i think it's pretty obvious that scripting languages are indeed "programming". you are creating a program to accomplish a task for you, therefore you are programming. i think that's pretty much undeniable truth. now, the real question, what takes more talent, being a proficient C* programmer or a perl/php/java one? i think we all know the answer to that whether you'll admit it or not. C* is grass roots programming, no garbage collection, no bounds checks, no nada but what you put there, and that is why i love it. the fact is, any C* programmer can pick up a silly scripting language very quickly, but for to go from scripting langs to C* is totally different. for the record, i know perl, shell scripting languages, and java, but C is my pride and joy.

programming language
n.
An artificial language used to write instructions that can be translated into machine language and then executed by a computer.

So it seems pretty straight forward. There's no debate to even be had. *shrug* I think everyone is just reading the question how they want to read it and then arguing their point based on their interpretation.

What I think most people get so rumped up about is when someone that found a script somewhere, changes one line of it, and then goes around acting like they're king of the world. But that's not even what this poll is about. It's just asking if it is or isn't programming. I think what people are answering this poll with is "how complicated a program does one have to have the ability to write before one is considered a programmer."

With that question there's a least room for opinion.

I've seen some pretty serious bash scripting. A friend of mine wrote a playable chess game (no AI) in bash. I would consider that programming.

program -- definition 6. "A set of coded instructions that enables a machine, especially a computer, to perform a desired sequence of operations."

Ever see the "program" that lets you play Space Invaders in Excel?

I agree!

A "hello world" in basic is esier than some html code so for me its just how you say things like programing java now, scripting perl now and writing-html.

Doesn't it sound bad in English to say "I'm programing html now" or "I markup C++" etc?

I disagree, I bet most C programmers would have a hard time picking up, say, LISP or Haskell, even though they're much more high level, don't have GC, etc.

Alex

As at least one exception to the rule, I am a C programmer -- but found Scheme ( which I had to use recently ) very intuitive and simple to pick up. As `jtshaw' said, programming ability is not directly related to the language you use, it is your approach. Most C programmers tend ( I know this is a generalisation based upon what I have seen ) to be better programmers in terms of the structure of their programs, and thus you can transport them to another language and they will still write good code. The worse of the bunch ( no offense to anyone who is, not everybody follows this ) seem to be Java programmers from my experience, the enforced modular and rigid control structure seems to degrade the ability of people who learn it as their primary language.

In my opinion, scripting is a subset of programming; therefore, scripting languages are a subset of programming languages. Moreover, scripting languages are those programming languages designed primarily for writing scripts in as opposed to more self-contained computer programs. I would disagree that the difference between a scripting language and a programming language is between being interpretted and being compiled: Old versions of BASIC were interpretted whereas new ones are compiled; Java and the .NET languages are compiled into bytecode and intermediate language, respectively and are later interpretted or just-in-time compiled into machine code.

A script is a program that interacts with the interface of a user-level program to augment that program's functionality. A broader-classed program might only rely on the operating system's core API or a few shared libraries of code. I suppose, if C++ were used to write a program to automate data entry in a word processor, that C++ program, though compiled, could be considered to be a script.

Likewise, a Perl "script" that provides a large domain of functionality might as well be considered to be a broader-classed program rather than a simple script.

To take this concept further, even DOS/Windows batch scripts qualify as programs of some kind. However, I'd draw the line at XML and HTML because these languages lack the ability to express executable instructions.

Cruxus, well put.