@deathshadowJul 04.2014 — #IF talking server-side, it shouldn't matter. IF you are making a website they ALL have to output HTML, and in terms of SEO the only thing that matters is? HTML. If a language can output to console, they can output HTML. Websites are HTML, if you have HTML you're fine. You have semantic markup -- aka using HTML [b]PROPERLY[/b] (very tempted to stop calling it semantic markup) -- of content of value, you're GOLDEN.
Mind you, using some tools can make the job harder -- visual studio when it comes to ASP.NET pages can really just behave like an incontinent cat on brand new carpets, making a mess that will never come out and you end up having to throw it away and start over (probably buying brown carpets). Using WYSIWYG editors can result in non-semantic markup that can really hamper your efforts since they vomit up presentational markup -- an accessibility mess; and usually if it's an accessibility mess, it's a mess for search too.
But the programming languages themselves? Those really aren't a problem. As long as you're outputting good HTML from them, it doesn't matter what language is gluing that HTML together.
The only language I can think that MIGHT have an impact would be an overuse of JavaScript to load large content sections via DHTML or AJAX with no graceful degradation. While Google has gotten better at handling it, on the whole endless pointless scripttardery loading content with no graceful degradation / scripting off option is rolling the dice with your fate... especially when Baidu turns it nose up at it. (when 76% of the Internet users in a country containing over four times the population of the US uses Baidu, don't dismiss it out of Google zeal!)
But again, that's not a problem with the language itself. Used properly there's nothing wrong with JavaScript -- the problem is how a lot of people use it; particularly in developing systems that have zero scripting off fallbacks. As the "unwritten rule of JavaScript" says: [i]If you can't make a fully functional page without JavaScript FIRST, you likely have no business adding scripting to it.[/i]
@deathshadowJul 07.2014 — #I don't consider flash a programming language -- actionScript is... which is PART of flash... though yeah, Flash based sites are trash.
The sad part is most of what makes flash based sites suck isn't even that it's flash or the whole "Oh but it requires a plugin" crap -- but that it's goofy bandwidth wasting animated crap that just gets in the way of users getting to the content.
Which of course is why people are trying to recreate what they did in Flash using Canvas and Scripting (and incorrectly calling it HTML 5). Kind of like the re-re's who use JS to emulate the behavior of TARGET and FRAMESETS -- completely missing the point!
@Strider64Jul 07.2014 — #I was using Flash instead of Actionscript for more people relate to the term "FLASH" - I know Flash isn't a programming language. :rolleyes: Another thing people will say when defending ActionScript is that it is very very similar to JavaScript and I don't want to get in that debate. :eek:
@deathshadowJul 07.2014 — # Another thing people will say when defending ActionScript is that it is very very similar to JavaScript and I don't want to get in that debate. :eek:[/QUOTE] Well, they are both technically offshoots of ECMAScript -- that's not necessarily a good thing.
NOT that when we say JavaScript we MEAN JavaScript, we MEAN ECMAScript.
But yeah, let's not go there -- that could threadjack this forever with debate.