MFTL

( /M·F·T·L/)

   [abbreviation: `My Favorite Toy Language']

   1.  adj.  Describes  a  talk on a programming language design that is
   heavy  on  the  syntax (with lots of BNF), sometimes even talks about
   semantics  (e.g., type systems), but rarely, if ever, has any content
   (see  {content-free}). More broadly applied to talks -- even when the
   topic is not a programming language -- in which the subject matter is
   gone  into  in  unnecessary and meticulous detail at the sacrifice of
   any conceptual content. "Well, it was a typical MFTL talk".

   2.  n. Describes a language about which the developers are passionate
   (often  to the point of proselytic zeal) but no one else cares about.
   Applied  to  the language by those outside the originating group. "He
   cornered me about type resolution in his MFTL."

   The  first  great  goal  in  the  mind  of the designer of an MFTL is
   usually  to  write  a compiler for it, then bootstrap the design away
   from  contamination  by lesser languages by writing a compiler for it
   in  itself.  Thus,  the standard put-down question at an MFTL talk is
   "Has  it  been  used  for  anything besides its own compiler?" On the
   other  hand,  a (compiled) language that cannot even be used to write
   its  own  compiler is beneath contempt. (The qualification has become
   necessary   because  of  the  increasing  popularity  of  interpreted
   languages  like  {Perl}  and {Python}.) See {break-even point}. (On a
   related note, Doug McIlroy once proposed a test of the generality and
   utility  of  a  language  and  the operating system under which it is
   compiled:  "Is the output of a FORTRAN program acceptable as input to
   the  FORTRAN  compiler?"  In other words, can you write programs that
   write programs? (See {toolsmith}.) Alarming numbers of (language, OS)
   pairs  fail  this  test,  particularly  when the language is FORTRAN;
   aficionados  are  quick to point out that {Unix} (even using FORTRAN)
   passes  it  handily.  That  the  test  could  ever  be failed is only
   surprising to those who have had the good fortune to have worked only
   under  modern  systems  which  lack  OS-supported  and -imposed "file
   types".)

[glossary]
[Reference(s) to this entry by made by: {break-even point}{toy language}]