Talk:Oxygene (programming language)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Proposal for deletion
This is just a commercial version of a compiler for object pascal. Spankman 06:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- So is Delphi and it's not being deleted. I think you should RfD this instead of PROD. --Arny 07:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Worse, I think the "object pascal" moniker is more marketing than descent. It looks like C# or Java that has been run through a preprocessor to look like Pascal. One can change the tokens, (like {} -> begin..end), but that doesn't make it Pascal.
Chrome is NOT a preprocessor for C#. It is a native .net compiler that does compile Object Pascal. There are some changes to make the pascal more in line with the .net framework. (like NameSpace instead of Unit) Chrome even has features that C# does not have, so it would not be even possible to create Chrome as a preprocessor. (Async methods, Meta Classes...) --Talandor 11:04, 19 Jul 2006
- This deletion request is non-sense. According to his argument we could just delete all commercial compilers from wikipedia. --Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho 19:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Advertising
The tone of the article seems more like advertising than anything else. 21:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Well this is a Wiki page, so anyone can add or change stuff on this article, but I am about the only one that contributes to this article. I am a happy user of Chrome, so I don't know much bad things I can say about it... Can you give me some hints on how to make it less advertising? Listing the language features is something that about all programming language articles do.
Best Regards Talandor 07:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
In addition to the code examples and the factual features list, there are just a few introductional sentences, not showing any plaudit. This article is definitely keeping the subject in perspective. Advertising unknowable.
Can you give an example to make the article better? Most features link to another Wiki page, It would be stupid to put all that info here all over again. Talandor 11:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Chrome-150-White.png
Image:Chrome-150-White.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI, logo image has been replaced with new/approved logo. hopefully the fair use details provided are sufficient, in any case, i represent the owner of the image copyright and herbeby grant the use.
