On 12/6/20, cigar562hfsp952f...@icebubble.org
wrote:
> Lucio De Re writes:
>
>> But do we want a flock of 9front-wielding droids flooding the 9fans
>> mailing list?
>
> Good point. [ ... ] Maybe we should keep Plan 9 a secret. ;)
Well, that's one way of spreading it, yes.
>
> It would be nice if there was some way to translate between technology
> intended for idiots and technology intended for experts. Imagine if,
> for example, every Android app automatically exported its functionality
> over 9P. The cell phone idiots would have all their flashy toasts and
> swipes, but the apps would still be usable by command line nerds.
>
I like that idea. Might not be as far-fetched as it may seem at a
glance: surely, a human organism could be "generated" from a simpler
DNA than the present one (merged chromosome-2 in humans suggests I'm
not wrong, but I rate rank amateur regarding genetics), if one removes
all the twists and turns of evolution from it. The same may be
possible with, say, Linux. Much less so with Plan 9, so a deep,
enlightened comparison should be instructive. Something like Lion's or
Nemo's Commentaries, maybe as a black room redevelopment as was done
with the IBM PC BIOS. Or as a brand new mathematical theory of
Information.
[ ... ]
> That sounds like a variant of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (which applies
> to natural languages) as applied to computer languages.
>
Thanks, I need to look that one up. As a very under-educated, remote
"scholar", such nuggets only reach me by accident. But seSotho is the
local "vernacular", one of nine "official" African ("tribal" is close
to the truth) languages in this country. I cannot fathom what kind of
hoops people taught in these languages need to go through to
comprehend modern science. I find my native Italian pretty close to
stultifying when technology is involved. Poetic, certainly, emotional,
definitely, good for songs, but below inadequate, as compared to
English to express scientific and technological concepts, but that
used to be until quite recently, German's role, too. I guess we have
to thank the Yanks for shifting that, or the Yanks have to thank the
colonising Brits for beating the French.
Twists and turns, indeed.
> Pascal has pointers, too, and they make alot more sense than pointers in
> C.
>
Not to me, they don't. They do belong in C, which is a partially
successful, glorified assembler, not a programming language. Partially
successful as applied to being an assembler. No one can deny C's
success in getting computers to do what is demanded of them. But the
key is that we build computers to do what we want, not what we ask and
C allows that in spades, by making us think like the machines. Hm,
more accurately, forcing us to model the target automaton in our head.
Solving problems, seems to me, ought to ignore the target instruction
set as long as possible.
It's tempting to think of human relationships, which also pretty much
rely on assumptions rather than statements - I presume that "proving"
the validity of code in this sense may mean simply removing all kinds
of "lies" that lurk in the model it is meant to reproduce
(simplistically, of course).
Lucio.
PS: Rambling, as usual. It helps me thinking, my hope is that it will
be confirmed or denied by the "crowd" so I can move on from there.
--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink:
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T3fd028fcf2eeb24c-Mf498142699b81d3110aed41d
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription
