Talk:Magic (programming)
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Tgm1024 in topic There is no such concept. Who is making up this stuff?
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Magic (programming) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Deep magic was copied or moved into Magic (programming) with this edit on 29 September 2015. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Clarification required
editWhat is "the flight simulator Easter egg"??? --84.250.188.136 (talk) 03:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Expected to read about "compiler magic", e.g. built-ins/intrinsics that can do things normal functions can't. 88.159.65.111 (talk) 20:29, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
- Anything in common with Syntactic sugar? MatthewRPG (talk) 01:22, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
An example could be interesting for "Any comment that has an effect on the code is magic." MatthewRPG (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
There is no such concept. Who is making up this stuff?
editWhat is the lure involved in the invention of terms out of whole cloth? This entire page is nonsense. 𝓦𝓲𝓴𝓲𝓹𝓮𝓭𝓲𝓪𝓘𝓼𝓝𝓸𝓽𝓟𝓮𝓮𝓻𝓡𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓮𝔀𝓮𝓭-𝓟𝓮𝓮𝓻𝓡𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓮𝔀𝓮𝓭𝓜𝓮𝓪𝓷𝓼𝓡𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓮𝔀𝓮𝓭𝓑𝔂𝓟𝓮𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓞𝓷𝓵𝔂 (talk) 03:43, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- I would have to disagree with you. This entry is based off of the jargon file which has been around for over 50 years now. Writing a page for this term is no different than writing a page on any other long established slang term. 24.161.39.9 (talk) 00:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
- That someone dropped a silly entry into "the" jargon file does not make this a "long established slang term". I've been a software engineer for over 40 years now, and this "magic" business is simply not a CS term.
- Sometime being 50 years old does not make it established, and certainly shouldn't be lent credence as if it has an accepted meaning. I remember the Jargon file during its later heyday of being copied around usenet in the 80's. The Jargon file was an intentional absurdity at the time of its creation, not some kind of document of authority. 𝓦𝓲𝓴𝓲𝓹𝓮𝓭𝓲𝓪𝓘𝓼𝓝𝓸𝓽𝓟𝓮𝓮𝓻𝓡𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓮𝔀𝓮𝓭-𝓟𝓮𝓮𝓻𝓡𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓮𝔀𝓮𝓭𝓜𝓮𝓪𝓷𝓼𝓡𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓮𝔀𝓮𝓭𝓑𝔂𝓟𝓮𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓞𝓷𝓵𝔂 (talk) 17:28, 29 November 2022 (UTC)