But it also depends on how it's written: #!/usr/bin/perl push(@me_off, 'a cliff');
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 9:19 PM, Pall Thayer <[email protected]> wrote: > And, as a reply to Seibel's comments, do we not "decode" literature? I've > always felt a deep divide between people who have a background in > programming/engineering/tech stuff who have moved into creative realms > ("Art") and those who have a background in the arts but have moved towards > programming/engineering ("tech"). It feels to me that the tech-background > people have a harder time seeing programming as "art". To them, the product > might be art, but not the process. They tend to be the ones to raise the > question, "is the paint brush the art?" It all depends on how you approach > it. The "paint brush" can, in fact, be the art. > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Pall Thayer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Alan, I think you make an excellent point here. "Who is looking at the >> code and for what purposes?" The only thing that differentiates programming >> code from other written text is its perceived purpose and people's reasons >> for reading the text. If, in reading, you look for prose, you will find it. >> If you don't, you won't. Likewise, if you look at an image, seeking art, >> you will find it. If you're looking for something else, you won't find the >> art. >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Alan Sondheim <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Well, there are a number of issues here. In the first place, they're >>> looking at code for particular reasons, to understand it in particular >>> ways; code as literature or as part-objects within literature (codework) is >>> not meant to be decoded the same way. Think of counting the number of "t"s >>> for example in a poem - that's also a way of decoding it, but is of course >>> different than literary reading. I think there's a hermeneutics involved >>> here, as well as the Wittgensteinian idea of "family of usages" - so who is >>> looking at the code/codework, for what purpose, and so forth? It's >>> problematic; since code is primarily originating with programmers, they're >>> interested in its functionality, taking it apart, but that's not it's only >>> function, certainly not within the aegis of literature. An interesting >>> aside to this of course is reading a mathematical text, which I think _can_ >>> be a work of literature fairly directly - for example Einstein's theory of >>> relativity. One's reading speeds and slows, and the formulas require >>> decoding as well, but of a different sort, I think; I also feel that, say, >>> cosmological formulas are denser and more layered, more difficult to >>> unravel perhaps, than most programming code - but I may well be mistaken >>> here (and should take this whole sentence back!). >>> >>> - Alan >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 23 Jan 2014, marc garrett wrote: >>> >>> Code Is Not Literature - or is it? >>>> >>>> I was browsing Slashdot as one does and found a link to an article >>>> called ?Code Is Not Literature?. >>>> >>>> >>>> As I was reading this I was thinking of Mez and Alan Sondheim, and >>>> thought to myself - surely, if someone turns it into literature, then it is >>>> literature? >>>> >>>> Anyway, have a read and see what you think? >>>> >>>> >>>> "Hacker and author Peter Seibel has done a lot of work to adopt one of >>>> the most widely-accepted practices toward becoming a better programmer: >>>> reading high quality code. He's set up code-reading groups and interviewed >>>> other programmers to see what code they read. But he's come to learn that >>>> the overwhelming majority of programmers don't practice what they preach. >>>> Why? He says, 'We don't read code, we decode it. We examine it. A piece of >>>> code is not literature; it is a specimen.' He relates an anecdote from >>>> Donald Knuth about figuring out a Fortran compiler, and indeed, it reads >>>> more like a 'scientific investigation' than the process we refer to as >>>> 'reading.' Seibel is now changing his code-reading group to account for >>>> this: 'So instead of trying to pick out a piece of code and reading it and >>>> then discussing it like a bunch of Comp Lit. grad students, I think a >>>> better model is for one of us to play the role of a 19th century naturalist >>>> returning from a trip to some exotic island to present to the local >>>> scientific society a discussion of the crazy beetles they found.'" >>>> http://developers.slashdot.org/story/14/01/21/1847217/ >>>> code-is-not-literature >>>> >>>> Here?s Seibel?s original text on his blog >>>> >>>> http://www.gigamonkeys.com/code-reading/ >>>> >>>> wishing you well. >>>> >>>> marc >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NetBehaviour mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> == >>> email archive http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/ >>> web http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 347-383-8552 >>> music: http://www.espdisk.com/alansondheim/ >>> current text http://www.alansondheim.org/si.txt >>> == >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NetBehaviour mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> ***************************** >> Pall Thayer >> artist >> http://pallthayer.dyndns.org >> ***************************** >> > > > > -- > ***************************** > Pall Thayer > artist > http://pallthayer.dyndns.org > ***************************** > -- ***************************** Pall Thayer artist http://pallthayer.dyndns.org *****************************
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
