Talk:Blub (programming)

This article was nominated for deletion on 28 August 2008 (UTC). The result of the discussion was merge to Paul Graham.

Blub = Important word in everyday CS conversation

You might as well strike "Being" for lack of notability (yes, that's older and more published, but it starts with a revealing "Some philosophers deny that the concept of "being" has any meaning at all"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.24.122.162 (talk) 20:13, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neologism?

One on hand, searching Google for "blub -site:wikipedia.org -site:paulgraham.com" finds some not-so-trivial results.

On the other hand, most of those results are blogs.

If there's nothing better than blogs, then i guess that some content from this article should be merged to Paul Graham. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 12:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even if the Blub paradox is in fact a neologism (a recently coined term), I don't believe that alone should disqualify it from inclusion. The Blub paradox has been a widely discussed idea in the programming language community, and is likely to remain the standard term for discussing the idea it neatly encapsulates for the foreseeable future. The article's usefulness factor to anyone trying to join in the conversation about modern programming languages seems to outweigh any negatives we might attribute to the fact the term was coined in the last decade. I believe we should consider removing the notability tag. --Travis Cross (talk) 17:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I Googled for "Blub" and found this. This is what I was looking for. Remove some of the cereal articles instead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_breakfast_cereals .. thanks.

-- Lars Rune Nøstdal http://nostdal.org/

Wikiproject Computing

I have removed the WikiProject tag, as this article is either a redirect or deleted. If you oppose, please restore the tag. Thank you, fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 16:12, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]