The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete.  Sandstein  05:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Synthetic programming[edit]

Synthetic programming (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

First of all, the couple of sentences in this page don't really mean anything, as far as I can tell. "Assembly language programming in scripting languages"? What is that supposed to mean? Anyway, I had never heard of this, which led me to do a quick Google search, and there doesn't seem to be anything on Google about this either. At least under this name. Dtm1234 (talk) 15:49, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Caution advised: The first page listed in the "Implementations" sources has been reported as a malware attack page by at least one anti-viral service. I know of an editor who uses Sandbox VM's to investigate this sort of stuff safely - I will approach him about opening the page and pasting it's text into subpage here for us to assess. Snow (talk) 21:59, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Alright, so thanks to the quick and generous assistance of the afore-mentioned editor, I have this to report:

"The 15th of this month Google found some malware on corepy.org. Here is a piece of HTML that was archived with the wayback machine. I think its clean now, it seems like they simply restored a backup that was made before the attack happened, but the website contains at least 7500 links (it is a mediawiki installation) so we are going to have to wait until Google checks it again to see if they cleaned it all up. The website looks like this in Chrome."

So it seems the page is likely clean, but with the screenshot available for evaluative purposes, users should still use their discretion and probably avoid the site for the time being (or at least apply caution if navigating there) as neither I nor the editor I consulted with are experts capable of determining that it has been completely cleaned. Snow (talk) 23:33, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Dtm1234 (talk) 00:09, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NP. ;) Snow (talk) 03:23, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Based on the page the screenshot of that page above, it seems like that is just a way of doing inline assembly, something about which there is already a perfectly good article about. Synthetic programming seems to be, at best, just another (very uncommon) way of talking about that or, more likely, a neologism. Dtm1234 (talk) 00:14, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The rare occurrences of the term "synthetic programming" in the literature, such as here, appear to be completely unrelated to the topic of this article (which is indeed inline assembly). The term is not a plausible name for inline assembly and does not occur in the given references.  --Lambiam 17:49, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - a not very notable term for inline assembly in python scripts that seems to have been coined by two authors (link), and probably isn't used by very many other people given the small number of relevant Google hits. CodeTheorist (talk) 22:13, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.