On 10/3/2012 2:46 PM, Paul Homer wrote:
I think it's because that's what we've told them to ask for :-)
In truth we can't actually program 'everything', I think that's a
side-effect of Godel's incompleteness theorem. But if you were to take
'everything' as being abstract quantity, the more we write, the closer
our estimation comes to being 'everything'. That perspective lends
itself to perhaps measuring the current state of our industry by how
much code we are writing right now. In the early years, we should be
writing more and more. In the later years, less and less (as we get
closer to 'everything'). My sense of the industry right now is that
pretty much every year (factoring in the economy and the waxing or
waning of the popularity of programming) we write more code than the
year before. Thus we are only starting :-)
yeah, this seems about right.
from my own experience, new code being written in any given area tends
to drop off once that part is reasonably stable or complete, apart from
occasional tweaks/extensions, ...
but, there is always more to do somewhere else, so on average the code
gradually gets bigger, as more functionality gets added in various areas.
and, I often have to decide where I will not invest time and effort.
so, yeah, this falls well short of "everything"...
Paul.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Pascal J. Bourguignon <p...@informatimago.com>
*To:* Paul Homer <paul_ho...@yahoo.ca>
*Cc:* Fundamentals of New Computing <fonc@vpri.org>
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 3, 2012 3:32:34 PM
*Subject:* Re: [fonc] How it is
Paul Homer <paul_ho...@yahoo.ca <mailto:paul_ho...@yahoo.ca>> writes:
> The on-going work to enhance the system would consistent of
modeling data, and creating
> transformations. In comparison to modern software development,
these would be very little
> pieces, and if they were shared are intrinsically reusable (and
recombination).
Yes, that gives L4Gs. Eventually (when we'll have programmed
everything) all computing will be only done with L4Gs: managers
specifying their data flows.
But strangely enough, users are always asking for new programs...
Is it
because we've not programmed every functions already, or because
we will
never have them all programmed?
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
fonc@vpri.org
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
_______________________________________________
fonc mailing list
fonc@vpri.org
http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
