I disagree. We do our best. This is always the case. The problem with language is ... there is no problem. The "problem" is with people and their lack of awareness.
I agree that "our best" currently sucks, though. Words aren't the things they refer to - they're just pointers. The only way to precisely use language is to realise that it's not precise, and therefore stipulate DSLs. What's your point? Julian On 08/05/2012, at 4:07 PM, Clinton Daniel wrote: > The other side of that coin is burdening users with a bunch of new > terms to learn that don't link to existing human concepts and words. > "Click to save the document" is easier for a new user to grok than > "Flarg to flep the floggle" ;) > > Seriously though, in the space of programming language design, there > is a trade-off in terms of quickly conveying a concept via reusing a > term, versus coining a new term to reduce the impedance mismatch that > occurs when the concept doesn't have exactly the same properties as an > existing term. > > Clinton > > > On 8 May 2012 00:14, John Pratt <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> The problem with programming languages and computers in general is that they >> hijack existing human concepts and words, usurping them from everyday usage >> and flattening out their meanings. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
