I would gladly pay somebody to maintain code in each of these languages and more besides if it would get the “$x is dead!” forum trolls to sit on their hands for twenty minutes. We could start a foundation or something.
ok bear. > On Jun 16, 2026, at 7:31 PM, Mike Katz via cctalk <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I'm sure there are more "dead" computer languages than there are living ones. > > However, what is the definition of a dead computer language. Here are a few > potential definitions (choose one or more or add your own): > > * If the language is not running, as an interpreter or compiler, on > any currently manufactured computer. Running on antique computers > or simulators doesn't count. > * If no one is being paid to program in that language or maintain code > in that language. > * If the standards for the language have not been updated in more than > 10 (25, 50) years. > * If the language is no longer being used in a production/commercial > environment. > * If the language is only being used in the > hobbyist/historian/antique/simulation environments. > > Here is an example question: There is an in production add on to an antique > computer written and being supported in Forth. The Forth > interpreter/compiler is running on a modern ARM based micro. Even though the > target of the product is an antique computer since it is using a current > technology micro with a supported forth, I would say that Forth is not a dead > language. > > Here is a list of languages from my past, how many of them are officially > dead by one or more of the above definitions? > > APL > Forth > Lisp > Algol > Dibol > Focal > Occam > Prolog > Watfor & Watfive > Ratfor > Flap > Ralf > Teco (editor and macro language) > Pilot > DB2 > Foxbase > Any of the Hp Calculator languages (RPL, HP-41 User code) > I'm sure their are dead dialects of BASIC but BASIC is currently supported as > Visual Basic and Dartmouth Basic. > > Please update this list as to whether any of these languages are dead (by the > current definition above) or alive. Also, please add new definitions and > languages that are dead or nearly dead. > > Note: Dead dialects of a living language don't count. >
