> 2. Do we need programming languages at all? Why not write precise > high-level specifications and have the system generate the program, > thereby saving time and eliminating coding error?
Then the "high-level specification" _is_ the programming language, albeit a relatively unusual one, with the thing you call "the system" being what is normally called the language's compiler. Such very-high-level languages are a perennial idea. As you point out, they aren't always appropriate, but when they are they can be helpful. But they don't eliminate programming, any more than COBOL (which was supposed to make it possible to write programs in plain English and thereby eliminate programming as a skill) did. And they won't eliminate coding error. They'll eliminate certain classes of coding error, just as assembly does as compared to machine language, or as C or Pascal does as compared to assembly language - but coding errors will still occur, just as they do in assembly or C. They'll just be errors at or above the level at which the code is written. Or, of course, they'll due to be bugs in the compiler. /~\ The ASCII der Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML [EMAIL PROTECTED] / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
