Well, you're right.  The way I phrased it isn't at all proper.  I meant the
authors were using economy of expression [1] as their metric.  In
programming languages lingo, the phrase "more expressive" the authors use is
co-opting the meaning of expressive as defined by Felleisen's expressiveness
framework [2] or Hewitt and Patterson's Comparative Schematology [3] [4].  I
am asking a general question: Why is economy of expression deceitful?

[1] http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?EconomyOfExpression
[2] http://www.ccs.neu.edu/scheme/pubs/scp91-*felleisen*.ps.gz
[3] http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/6291
[4] http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/5849

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 6:59 AM, Reuben Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 14 July 2010 00:01, John Zabroski <[email protected]> wrote:
> > [1] 
> > http://www.cs.stir.ac.uk/~kjt/techreps/pdf/TR141.pdf<http://www.cs.stir.ac.uk/%7Ekjt/techreps/pdf/TR141.pdf>
> FOR FUN: Where is
> > the bug here?  The authors claim they are measuring the *economic*
> > expressiveness of languages.
>
> I think I don't really follow you here (you seem in a slightly
> whimsical mood), but I just thought I'd point out that the authors
> claim no such thing. The word "economic" does not appear in the paper.
> "Economically" appears once, and the context is: "Halstead’s claim is
> that the higher the mean language level the more powerful the language
> is. We prefer instead to say ‘more expressive’ by which we mean that
> the same algorithm can be expressed more economically." That is, the
> authors are talking about economy, i.e. brevity, of expression, and
> not about economics.
>
> If by the reference to cargo cults, you mean a sort of inverse cargo
> cult in which the shorter the program, the simpler it's supposed to
> be, I say "hear hear!" while distancing myself from the concordant
> cheers of the APL-haters.
>
> --
> http://rrt.sc3d.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> fonc mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
>
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
[email protected]
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc

Reply via email to