Talk:MUMPS
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the MUMPS 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 |
Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
MUMPS at MGH and Partners?
[edit]Removed the reference to MUMPS at Partners and MGH since it was in the "Health IT Company" paragraph, and neither are Healthcare IT companies. If Partners is a significant user of MUMPS outside their 2015 to 2017 Epic EHR implementation that would belong in a "MUMPS Users" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.34.69.100 (talk) 18:53, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
Fix to CCSM
[edit]I am wary of conflict of Interest issues, but this page says that CCSM stood for Computer Consultants Standard MUMPS. As I worked for a company that used CCSM, I can testify that the acronym stood for Comp Consultants Standard MUMPS. Should I change it, or can I refer to http://www.mumpster.org/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=62 and
https://books.google.com/books?id=mt0cw1-3PIkC&pg=RA1-PA123&lpg=RA1-PA123&dq="CCSM"+"Comp+Consultants"&source=bl&ots=bI-dZam_uL&sig=ACfU3U1Dg2yW97vv0h5Gc7YkDNyLMuJvqg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwje-fLx8szoAhXylOAKHYPvBI0Q6AEwAXoECAsQKQ#v=onepage&q="CCSM"%20"Comp%20Consultants"&f=false
to support my claim and have someone else fix it ? DaveJWhitten (talk) 18:36, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Transclusion of MUMPS syntax into MUMPS page ?
[edit]Has anyone thought about transcluding this page into the MUMPS page so it could be available to the interested reader but not bulking up the page when editing ? Is there any Wikipedia Policy which might be relevant to doing this ? I will follow the steps listed on my (talk page to allow anyone to object re my conflict of interest. The date of this note is the base date for my approach mentioned there. 16:29, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
Variable Declarations or Not?
[edit]The section on language features states "Declarations: None. All variables are dynamically created at the first time a value is assigned." But the Criticisms section refers to local variable declarations. Which is it? Ross Fraser (talk) 01:55, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Variable scoping: it's called 'Dynamic Scoping'
[edit]The discussion pertaining to how local variables are scope makes circumlocutional reference to this. For Static Scoping variables in a routine, that are not defined therein, refer to global variables. For Dynamic Scoping, they refer to the locals of whatever routine called that routine, if any, or else to globals. Dynamic Scoping is not, in any way, idiosyncratic to MUMPS. LISP also had it (and some dialects still do). So does bash, perl (optionally), as well as the POSIX/UNIX language bc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.29.226.169 (talk) 18:36, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- C-Class Computing articles
- Low-importance Computing articles
- C-Class software articles
- Mid-importance software articles
- C-Class software articles of Mid-importance
- All Software articles
- C-Class Early computers articles
- High-importance Early computers articles
- C-Class Early computers articles of High-importance
- All Computing articles