Is LabVIEW a 4GL?

[RGreg]

Yesterday the subject of the Wikipedia listing for 4th generation languages came up on the Info-LabVIEW list.  Specifically, LV was not listed as a 4GL and the consensus was that it should be.  Someone then added it under successful fourth-generation languages. 

Now, leaving out the current web assumption that if it is on Wikipedia then it must be true , is it REALLY a 4GL?  It seems to me that LV has more in common with C++ or VB than it does with the other items on that list.  I would argue that LV is certainly a domain-specific programming language (DSL), "a programming language designed for, and intended to be useful for, a specific kind of task."  But it seems too limiting to list it as a 4GL if, as the article states, "some researchers state that 4GLs are a sub-set of DSLs."

I cede the floor for further discussion.

[David_B]

It almost seems from reading through your links that the definitions and difference between a 4GL and a DSL need to be hammered down before LabVIEW can be really solidly find a home under either flag.  Historically, it may be said that LabVIEW was meant to be a DSL and (depending on the definition) a 4GL, but over time, functionality has been added that has made it a very suitable replacement for many applications that previously favored a 3GL.

Anyway, my two cents,

[rpursley8]

Control Engineering magazine also refers to LabVIEW as a 4GL language