Nice. Where is it? My google-fu is not strong enough apparently.
- Bert -
On Nov 22, 2007, at 16:38 , william pearson wrote:
I have developed a visual notation that is understandable by an 11
year old, is just as compact as code and fully expressive. It is
also fully compatible with OO, higher order functional programming
and logic programming. I think it would make a great front end, and
is definitely on the "frontiers of computing".
Regards,
William Pearson
On 22/11/2007, Waldemar Kornewald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi
Warren,
On Nov 21, 2007 8:57 PM, Warren DeLano <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> PS. Croquet/Squeak is perhaps the closest thing I have yet found
to my
> idealized computing environment (dynamic, visual, interactive, and
> introspective, with everything an object, and open-source of
course),
> but I share Waldemar's reactions regarding UI complexity,
performance,
> and SmallTalk syntax.
Actually, the syntax isn't such a big problem. It's verbose, but OTOH
I think this makes it easier to read because you don't have to guess
what each argument stands for and the expressions form nice sentences.
I'm not sure what is better, but I've often heard experienced
programmers say that they've come to realize that code readability is
the most important thing because you have to spend a lot of time
understanding other people's code, esp. when joining a new team.
What bothers me more about the syntax is that it breaks math
conventions. Even a child knows that a + b / c is not the same as (a +
b) / c. This is unintuitive in that it is inconsistent with what we
learn at school and anyone who has to use even very basic math should
know and be able to expect those rules. With Smalltalk I fear mixing
conventions up when doing math or programming.
Apart from that I could easily live with the syntax. It just should be
easy to read, easy to think in, and follow basic math/science
conventions. Lisp, Forth, Prolog, and Haskell (%|()::++->>= \_;%!ยง,
anyone? ;) fail badly in at least the first two points, as do most
other languages invented by scientists. These are all niche languages.
Of course, mainstream languages are not as powerful as the
"scientific" ones, but obviously most programmers prefer something
that doesn't make them think and talk like an alien from a parallel
universe...or a scientist. :)
It's ironic that as scientists we learn complexity, but no simplicity.
If at all, we substitute simplicity for conciseness or power. I think
this is hindering innovation more than anything.
I hope this is not understood as a rant, but rather as a chance to
collect problems and fix them before it's too late.
Regards,
Waldemar Kornewald
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
[email protected]
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
[email protected]
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
[email protected]
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
