-----
title: "10 programming languages worth checking out"
content-type: article
subtitle: "A quick comparison of 10 non-mainstream programming languages"
popular: true
timestamp: 1229868075
tags: "programming"
-----
<div class="toast">
  <ul>
    <li>This article has been translated into <a
        href="http://science.webhostinggeeks.com/10-programskih-jezika">Serbo-Croatian</a> by <cite><a
          href="http://webhostinggeeks.com/">Web Geeks</a></cite></li>
    <li>This article has been translated into <a
        href="https://www.homeyou.com/~edu/10-linguagens-de-programacao">Portuguese</a> by <cite><a
          href="https://www.homeyou.com/~edu/">Artur Weber</a></cite></li>
    <li>This article has been translated into <a
        href="http://www.1001-soldes.com/traductions/10-programming-languages.html">French</a> by <cite>Avice
        Robitaille</cite></li>
  </ul>
</div>
<div class="v-spacer"></div>
<p>If you program for fun or profit, chances are that you know C, C++, Java, <span class="caps">PHP</span>, Perl, Python
  or Ruby. These programming languages are all widely known, and, to a different degree, used in commercial
  applications. At least some of them can safely be considered <em>mainstream</em>, even if that word has become so
  overused and misused that has almost lost its original meaning, if it ever had one.</p>
<p>If you are earning your living by coding, it's often one of these languages that pays the bills. Nevertheless,
  true hackers frequently meander in other directions, exploring and discovering different paradigms and methodologies,
  sometimes to the most <a href="http://esolangs.org/wiki/Main_Page">esoteric</a> extremes.</p>
<blockquote>
  <p>&#8220;The most obvious common &#8216;personality' characteristics of hackers are high intelligence,
    consuming curiosity, and facility with intellectual abstractions. Also, most hackers are &#8216;neophiles',
    stimulated by and appreciative of novelty (especially intellectual novelty). Most are also relatively
    individualistic and anti-conformist.&#8221;</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="padding-left:2rem;">&ndash; Eric S. Raymond, <cite><a href="http://catb.org/jargon/html/personality.html">The
      Jargon File</a></cite></p>
<p>Even if you're particularly devoted to one of the languages mentioned above, it is normal to be curious about
  what else is out there. As the end of the year approaches, I find myself thinking about learning &ndash; or at least
  become acquainted with &ndash; some less known, more experimental, programming languages.<br />
  I was originally planning on learning another programming language as a New Year's Resolution, which is quite
  common among programmers. The most difficult task turned out to be <em>choosing</em> a particular language: there are
  so many out there which makes it very hard to decide.</p>
<p>This article deals with ten possible candidates, and it's far from being an exhaustive list. The programming
  languages described henceforth are very different from each other, but they all have one thing in common: they all
  stimulate my curiosity in their own, very different ways.</p>
<h3 id="haskell">Haskell</h3>
<p>I tried to learn Haskell in the past. Quietly, I started diving into the multitude of articles, tutorials, overviews
  and even books about this fascinating academic language which claims to achieve functional purity though remaining
  extremely useful, practical and efficient. Sadly, I'm still not able to fully grasp some of its most crucial
  concepts, such as <a href="http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:Haskell_monads">monads</a>, but this still
  doesn't put me off <em>wishing</em> to learn the language.</p>
<p>If you've never enountered Haskell before, I find <a
    href="http://www.willamette.edu/~fruehr/haskell/evolution.html">The Evolution of a Haskell Programmer</a> an amusing
  and informative read. Although aiming to be humorous in a way, it serves a very important didascalic purpose: it is
  one of the most complete collections of the different paradigms and programming approaches Haskell allows.</p>
<p>Besides its very elegant, pragmatic and almost-magical syntax, what really intrigues me about this language is what
  it offers, in terms of features:</p>
<ul>
  <li>9 different <a href="http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Implementations">implementations</a> (multiple compilers
    <em>and</em> interpreters)
  </li>
  <li>Countless <a href="http://haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/libraries/">standard libraries</a> <a
      href="http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/pkg-list.html">packages</a> which can be used to solve
    <em>any</em> programming challenge
  </li>
  <li>Abundant <a href="http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Books_and_tutorials">learning material</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Why_Haskell_matters#The_speed_of_Haskell">Speed</a> that rivals C and
    C++</li>
  <li>Very mature cross-platform compatibility</li>
</ul>
<p>The catch? It is likely to be very different from any other language you might have encountered before, and
  that's probably the reason why some people find it difficult to learn and master. That being said, if you are
  looking for a challenging (but very rewarding, I believe) New Year's Resolution, you should definitely go for
  this.</p>
<h4>To get you started&#8230;</h4>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://www.haskell.org/">Official Haskell Wiki</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Haskell">Haskell Wikibook</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://book.realworldhaskell.org/read/index.html">Real World Haskell</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://cdsmith.wordpress.com/2007/07/29/37-reasons-to-love-haskell-playing-off-the-ruby-article/">37
      Reasons to Love Haskell</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/03/13/haskell-eye-for-the-ruby-guy/">Haskell for the Ruby Guy</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.techworld.com.au/article/261007/-z_programming_languages_haskell">A-Z of Programming
      Languages: Haskell</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://learnyouahaskell.com/">Learn you a Haskell for Great Good!</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/blog/2008/05/16">Haskell Hacking</a></li>
</ul>
<h3>Erlang</h3>
<p><a href="http://erlang.org/">Erlang</a> is a concurrent programming language originally developed by Ericsson for
  their real-time applications. It goes without saying that with these premise, Erlang seems the most natural answer to
  all concurrency problems you may encounter in your life as a programmer.<br />
  Developing with concurrency in mind feels natural and easy in Erlang, and the performance of Erlang-powered systems
  can be unmatched.</p>
<p>Quite a few interesting applications have been developed in this language, such as:</p>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://couchdb.apache.org/">CouchDB</a>, a popular distributed, document-oriented database</li>
  <li><a href="http://yaws.hyber.org/">Yaws</a>, a high-performance web server</li>
  <li>even <a href="http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=14218138919&amp;id=9445547199">Facebook Chat</a></li>
</ul>
<p>The price Erlang adepts have to pay, as Damien Katz (CouchDB creator and Erlang enthusiast) <a
    href="http://damienkatz.net/2008/03/what_sucks_abou.html">points out</a>, is:</p>
<ul>
  <li>Awkward syntax, inspired by Prolog</li>
  <li>Weird if expressions</li>
  <li>Difficult string operations</li>
  <li>No classes or namespaces</li>
</ul>
<p>&#8230;this list could go on. Damien's article is an interesting read, enough to put anyone off learning the
  language if read superficially. On the other hand, it provides an invaluable resource for newcomers who wish to be
  prepared before taking on the challenge of learning Erlang to build their next scalable, concurrent and industry-proof
  application.</p>
<h4>To get you started&#8230;</h4>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://www.erlang.org/">Official Erlang Web Site</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2007/09/13/introduction-to-erlang.html">An Introduction to Erlang</a>
  </li>
  <li><a href="http://www.defmacro.org/ramblings/concurrency.html">Erlang Style Concurrency</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.planeterlang.org/">PlanetErlang</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.erlang-projects.org/">Erlang Projects</a></li>
</ul>
<h3 id="io">Io</h3>
<p><a href="http://iolanguage.com/">Io</a> is a relatively new programming language by Steve Dekorte which recently
  surfaced from Google's oblivion (if you tried googling for it a few months ago, you couldn't event find
  its home page) thanks to a short vut stimulating <a
    href="http://hackety.org/2008/01/05/ioHasAVeryCleanMirror.html">article</a> by <a
    href="http://whytheluckystiff.net/">_why</a>. It doesn't have the best name for a programming language,
  that's for sure, but it's definitely a breath of fresh air in terms of the way it works.</p>
<p>Its unusual, minimalist and yet elegant and powerful syntax reminds of Smalltalk, but the language goes far beyond
  that. Io is an object-oriented, prototype-based, message-based and fully-reflective programming language. This means
  that you use messages like in Smalltalk, you create objects like in Javascript and every bit of your code can be
  inspected and passed around as you see fit.</p>
<p>If you think Ruby allows fancy (and potentially dirty) tricks like metaprogramming and monkey-patching, Io takes this
  to a whole different level, imposing virtually no limitation to the programmer. What's truly amazing is that its
  grammar and syntax are so minimal that you can learn them in literally 10 minutes. After that, you can start
  experimenting, first with its extremely small core and then with its extension libraries and bindings.</p>
<p>Io has indeed a lot of potential. Granted, it's still young and under development, but also already quite
  efficient and suitable for real-world tasks demanding high speed and concurrency. It is implemented in C, but Ola Bini
  started to design a similar language called <a href="http://kenai.com/projects/ioke/">Ioke</a> for the Java Virtual
  Machine.</p>
<h4>To get you started&#8230;</h4>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://iolanguage.com/">Official Io Web Site</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://github.com/stevedekorte/io/tree/master">Io Repository on Github</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/iolanguage/">Io user group</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://hackety.org/2008/01/05/ioHasAVeryCleanMirror.html">Io has a very clean mirror</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://iota.flowsnake.org/">Io Notes</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://wiki.type-z.org/index.php/Io/IoLanguage">Io Language Notes</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://ozone.wordpress.com/2006/03/15/blame-it-on-io/">Blame it on Io! A slow-paced introduction to the
      Io language</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:Io">Io Wikibook</a></li>
</ul>
<h3 id="plt-scheme"><span class="caps">PLT</span> Scheme</h3>
<p>I stumbled upon the <a href="http://plt-scheme.org/"><span class="caps">PLT</span> Scheme web site</a> while browsing
  for different Lisp flavors about a year ago. At the time, I was determined to learn the rudiments of Lisp and I
  started reading a few articles and books on this old and yet still popular language.<br />
  Although I was originally put off by certain Common Lisp literature, which dismissed Scheme as an almost-heretic
  attempt to revitalize an venerable language, I soon found out that Scheme &ndash; and <span class="caps">PLT</span>
  Scheme in particular &ndash; is definitely worthy of attention and interest.</p>
<p>Being a technical writer, I immediately became fond of the <a href="http://docs.plt-scheme.org/guide/"><span
      class="caps">PLT</span> Scheme Guide</a>, one of the clearest and most well-organized examples of documentation
  available for a programming language I've ever come across.<br />
  The manual is exquisitely crafted as a Getting Started Manual and a Reference Book at the same time, though remaining
  pleasant to read sequentially: a rare trait in technical documentation. Best of all, it's free: you simply have
  no real excuse not to read it.</p>
<p>Besides its excellent documentation, <span class="caps">PLT</span> Scheme feels like a fresh and modern
  implementation of one of the two most important dialects of Lisp. It's cross-platform, it has an extensive <a
    href="http://planet.plt-scheme.org/">collection of packages</a> and a very active community behind it. <br />
  After my first attempt to learn Haskell, I felt compelled to try out <span class="caps">PLT</span> Scheme and it
  immediately felt much easier and more user friendly to learn, partly because of <a
    href="http://download.plt-scheme.org/drscheme/">DrScheme</a> a dedicated <span class="caps">IDE</span>/learning tool
  optimized to get you started and feel comfortable with the language.<br />
  Caveats? None, unless you have an adversion for parenthesis, that is.</p>
<h4>To get you started&#8230;</h4>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://plt-scheme.org/">Official <span class="caps">PLT</span> Scheme Web Site</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://docs.plt-scheme.org/guide/index.html"><span class="caps">PLT</span> Scheme Guide</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://planet.plt-scheme.org/">PLaneT</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://docs.plt-scheme.org/quick/">Quick: An Introduction to <span class="caps">PLT</span> Scheme with
      Pictures</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://docs.plt-scheme.org/more/">More: Systems Programming with <span class="caps">PLT</span> Scheme</a>
  </li>
</ul>
<h3 id="clojure">Clojure</h3>
<p><a href="http://clojure.org/">Clojure</a> is the most recent and notable attempt to bring Lisp back to life and ready
  to face the challenges posed to IT systems by the new century: concurrency and scalability. Because it runs on the
  Java Virtual Machine, you also get Java interoperability for free, in a more Lispy flavour. Although I'm a bit
  reluctant to deal with anything related to Java nowadays, Clojure's approach makes it more appealing.</p>
<p>Unlike other Lisps (and Schemes) you may have encountered before, Clojure comes with some interesting additions:</p>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://clojure.org/multimethods">Multimethods</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://clojure.org/agents">Agents asynchronous actions</a></li>
  <li>Some interesting <a href="http://clojure.org/special_forms">special forms</a></li>
  <li>Many pre-built <a href="http://clojure.org/data_structures">data structures</a>, like Vectors, Maps, Sets,
    Collections, &#8230;</li>
</ul>
<p>Despite all this, Rich Hickey became increasingly popular both in the Lisp and Java world for creating such an
  interesting and well-designed language. Unlike with many new (and old) programming languages, I have yet to find a
  single blog post or article which is seriously criticizing Clojure in any way.</p>
<h4>To get you started&#8230;</h4>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://clojure.org">Official Clojure Web Site</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://groups.google.com/group/clojure">Clojure User Group</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.infoq.com/presentations/hickey-clojure">Clojure presentation on InfoQ</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://netzhansa.blogspot.com/2008/10/trying-clojure.html">Trying Clojure</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/msg/f038decc18c7da37">My first look at Clojure</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://enclojure.net/Index.html">Enclojure</a></li>
</ul>
<h3 id="squeak">Squeak</h3>
<p><a href="http://www.squeak.org/">Squeak</a> has become one of the most popular Smalltalk implementations available.
  It has been used in some very interesting projects:</p>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Smalltalk_Development_on_XO">EToys</a>, a kids-oriented but powerful
    development environment built in Squeak, was included as part of the educational sofware suite of the <a
      href="http://www.laptop.org"><span class="caps">OLPC</span></a>.</li>
  <li><a href="http://www.seaside.st/">Seaside</a> is a modern and very productive web framework running on Squeak.</li>
  <li><a href="http://www.croquetproject.org/index.php/Main_Page">Croquet</a> is a development solution to build
    complex, multi-user virtual worlds.</li>
</ul>
<p>If you ask <a href="http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/">Randal Schwartz</a>, he'll explain you <a
    href="http://www.infoq.com/articles/smalltalk-comeback-schwartz">why</a> Squeak and Smalltalk are at least worth a
  look. Personally, while I'm attracted by Smalltalk's unique approach to programming and its friendly
  syntax, I am still a bit overwhelmed by the way it works. <br />
  Squeak, and Smalltalk in general, runs inside (literally) a virtual machine written in Squeak itself. This means that:
</p>
<ul>
  <li>You write your code inside Squeak</li>
  <li>You debug, inspect and interact your code inside squeak</li>
  <li>You run your code inside Squeak</li>
  <li>You can install Squeak on virtually any platform, including mobile phones, fairly easily</li>
</ul>
<p>Everything lives inside Squeak. It's very weird to picture this without actually trying it, so I suggest you <a
    href="http://www.squeak.org/Download/">download it</a> and give it a try: it will definitely be an unusual but
  intriguing experience.</p>
<p>Smalltalk takes programming to a whole different level, which is simply unimaginable for other languages. In return,
  it asks you to fully embrace the Smalltalk way of doing things, according to which external text editors, external
  version control systems and other common tools familiar to traditional programmers simply loose their purpose.</p>
<h4>To get you started&#8230;</h4>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://www.squeak.org/">Official Squeak Web Site</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://squeakbyexample.org/">Squeak by Example</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.squeakland.org/">SqueakLand</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.infoq.com/articles/smalltalk-comeback-schwartz">Ruby's Roots: Smalltalk Comeback and
      Randal Schwartz on Smalltalk</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://twit.tv/floss29"><span class="caps">FLOSS</span> Weekly 29: Dan Ingalls</a></li>
</ul>
<h3 id="ocaml">OCaml</h3>
<p>Like Smalltalk, <a href="http://caml.inria.fr/">OCaml</a> has been getting more attention recently than in the past.
  Sure, not everyone is planning to learn is these days, but after reading <a
    href="http://enfranchisedmind.com/blog/2008/04/14/useful-things-about-static-typing/">this article</a> I admit I was
  eager to give it a proper try.</p>
<p>Despite being statically typed, OCaml offers some of the features which are common in dynamically typed languages
  like Ruby, such as duck typing, the possibility of creating Domain-Specific Languages and even extending the language
  syntax with custom operators and constructs.</p>
<p>Additionally, the <a href="http://batteries.forge.ocamlcore.org/">OCaml Batteries Included</a> project was created as
  an attempt to bundle a standard set of commonly-used library together with the language core. Even if this project is
  still in alpha stage, it definitely <a
    href="http://dutherenverseauborddelatable.wordpress.com/2008/11/07/a-taste-of-ocaml-batteries-included/">looks
    promising</a>.</p>
<h4>To get you started&#8230;</h4>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://caml.inria.fr/">Official Caml Web Site</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.ocaml-tutorial.org/">Objective Caml Tutorial</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.csc.villanova.edu/~dmatusze/resources/ocaml/ocaml.html">A Concise Introduction to Objective
      Caml</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://wiki.cocan.org/">The OCaml Alliance Network</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://ocamlnews.blogspot.com/">OCaml News</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://batteries.forge.ocamlcore.org/">OCaml Batteries Included</a></li>
</ul>
<h3>Factor</h3>
<p><a href="http://factorcode.org/">Factor</a> is to Forth what <a href="http://clojure.org">Clojure</a> is to Common
  Lisp: a reincarnation of an ancient language in a more modern and practical form. In the specific case, although it
  borrows from Lisp and Self as well, Factor retains the main characteristics of its ancestor: it's stack-based,
  concatenative and has postfix notation.<br />
  While this is enough to put some people off, if you digg deeper you'll discover that Factor offers all the most
  important features available in contemporary programming languages: garbage collection, dynamic typing, an object
  system, &#8230; they're just presented in a very different way:</p>
<blockquote>
  <p>&#8220;Learning Factor is tough. One reason for this is that Factor is very different from other programming
    languages. Programmers today are used to imperative programming languages where data is stored and passed around in
    named variables (or function calls, which name their variables). Factor is the opposite of this. A lot of code tends
    to be written in a functional style, and even more jarringly, variables are rare, only referenced in a small
    fraction of words. Nobody intends to change any of this; it's a feature, not a bug!&#8221;</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="padding-left:2rem;">&ndash; Daniel Ehrenberg, <cite><a
      href="http://useless-factor.blogspot.com/2008/01/learning-factor.html">Learning Factor</a></cite></p>
<p>Like Haskell, Factor demands a completely different programming approach to what you may be used to, but once you get
  past that, it can be as useful as any other language, if not more. The <a
    href="http://docs.factorcode.org/content/article-furnace.html">Furnace</a> web framework, which powers the <a
    href="http://concatenative.org/">Concatenative</a> wiki, is entirely built in Factor and runs on top of a Factor web
  server.</p>
<h4>To get you started&#8230;</h4>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://factorcode.org/">Official Factor Web Site</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://concatenative.org/wiki/view/Factor">Factor on the Concatenative Wiki</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://docs.factorcode.org/">Factor Documentation</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://learnfactor.org/">Learn Factor</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://planet.factorcode.org/">Planet Factor</a></li>
</ul>
<h3 id="lua">Lua</h3>
<p><a href="http://www.lua.org/">Lua</a> (&#8220;Moon&#8221; in Portuguese), is a lightweight and fast scripting
  language which can be easily embedded in other systems. Compared to the other languages mentioned in this article, it
  is definitely the less alien of the lot: if you know a tiny bit of C or Java, you'll be able to understand (and
  possibly write) 80% of Lua code without reading a single line of its documentation.</p>
<p>Despite its simplicity, Lua is considered a multi-paradigm language supporting imperative, functional and even
  object-oriented approaches. More specifically, Lua's <em>tables</em> provide a simple but powerful way to create
  arrays, hashes and even classes (or better, prototypes). Simple (and multiple) inheritance is achieved through
  <em>metatables</em>, which allow calls to undefined functions to be <em>transferred</em> to parent tables.
</p>
<p>Lua programs are not interpreted in the traditional way: they are compiled to bytecode and then executed in the Lua
  Virtual Machine. As a result, Lua code tends to be executed much faster than other interpreted languages, so fast that
  &#8220;as fast as Lua&#8221; has become a proverbial expression.<br />
  Lua found its niche in embedded applications and games development, basically everywhere there's the need to
  provide a fast scripting language which is also very easy to learn and extend with C or other languages.</p>
<h4>To get you started&#8230;</h4>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://www.lua.org/">Official Lua Web Site</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.lua.org/manual/">Lua Manual</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://lua-users.org/">Lua-users</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://icculus.org/~theoddone33/lua/">Learning Lua</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://lua.gts-stolberg.de/en/index.php?uml=1">Lua for Beginners</a></li>
</ul>
<h3 id="scala">Scala</h3>
<p>You may not be happy to see <a href="http://www.scala-lang.org/">Scala</a> in this list instead of other very valid
  and equally powerful languages for the Java Virtual Machine such as <a href="http://groovy.codehaus.org/">Groovy</a>.
  While there was no doubt on whether Clojure should have been included or not, I was a bit hesitant to include Scala.
  In the end, I chose to do so simply because Scala fits better in this list than other languages: as you should have
  noticed by now, I am somehow more inclined to learn functional languages as opposed to their object-oriented
  counterparts.</p>
<p>Scala is both object oriented and functional. It offers the best of both worlds: classes, traits and mixins which may
  be familiar to <span class="caps">OOP</span> lovers but also anonymous functions, currying and pattern matching which
  may please Haskell enthusiasts. Additionally, it's also compatible with Java: so if you use Java for work,
  trying out Scala for pleasure is definitely the most logical next step, especially if you want to experiment with
  functional programming in the meantime.</p>
<p>Compared to learning a fully-functional (no pun intended) language like Haskell, Clojure or <span
    class="caps">PLT</span> Scheme, learning Scala is definitely easier and will feel less alien.</p>
<h4>To get you started&#8230;</h4>
<ul>
  <li><a href="http://www.scala-lang.org/">Official Scala Web Site</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/Burnette/?p=690">The Case for Scala</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://scala.sygneca.com/">Scala Wiki</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://grok-code.com/75/learning-scala-with-project-euler/">Learning Scala with Project Euler</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/roundup-scala-for-java-refugees">Roundup: Scala for Java
      Refugees</a></li>
</ul>
<h3>Epilogue</h3>
<p>There are so many interesting programming language out there that it's very hard to keep track of all of them.
  I hope this list can aid you in the right direction, whichever it may be. <br />
  Some people may debate over the very essence of this article: why <em>choosing</em> a programming language? Why
  spending time and energy in a task which may lead to a lot of confusion in your mind and lead you nowhere?
  What's the purpose of learning something which may feel totally alien to you?</p>
<p>A programming language is ultimately just a tool to get your job done. If you have to write an end-user, desktop
  <span class="caps">GUI</span> application which will always run on Windows and which needs to inteface with Microsoft
  technologies, you'll choose C# over Haskell, there's no doubt about that. Especially if 500 developers in
  your company already develop in C# and you don't, as a matter of fact, have a saying on the matter.
</p>
<p>But what if you <em>could</em> choose? What if you wanted to develop your own geeky command line application to
  automate a particular task for yourself, and not because someone else tells you to do so? Would you be willing to
  experiment with something totally different and potentially difficult just for the sake of learning new things?</p>
<p>If the answer is yes, then you should take a look at this list again. Not now, maybe not this month or this year, but
  when you feel the time is right, and give one of these languages a shot. It may not end well (so far I attempted to
  learn Haskell twice, with no luck), but I promise you it will be worthwhile, in the long run. <br />
  If you already mastered some of these languages already, or even all of them, be assured that they're plenty out
  there ready to be discovered and open your mind even more. Or, if you prefer, there are a lot of minds out there which
  may need guidance in learning and discovery. Help them. Write articles, tutorials, books, educate and evangelize:
  ultimately, that will be your greatest reward.</p>