Re: [ppig-discuss] Rhetorical structure of code: Anyone interested in collaborating?

2016-05-06 Thread Raoul Duke
Possibly of interest https://groups.google.com/d/msg/eve-talk/di-a-d0NJpE/fz40MrzhCAAJ http://leoeditor.com/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PPIG Discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to

Re: [ppig-discuss] Rhetorical structure of code: Anyone interested in collaborating?

2016-05-02 Thread Richard A. O'Keefe
On 2/05/16 4:17 PM, Mark Levison wrote: Richard - thank you signalling contempt for anyone us who help their clients simplify their code. I will take the hint and sign off this list. Dear Mark. I did not express contempt for ANYONE AT ALL. Still less did I express contempt, disdain,

Re: [ppig-discuss] Rhetorical structure of code: Anyone interested in collaborating?

2016-05-02 Thread David Barbour
I would separate Richard's query into two aspects: (1) how do we reason about and enforce semantic structure, e.g. that files are closed once (and only once) upon opening, that handshakes are completed in the correct order, etc.. (2) how do we align semantic structure with

Re: [ppig-discuss] Rhetorical structure of code: Anyone interested in collaborating?

2016-05-02 Thread Raoul Duke
> No doubt it could be construed as either-or rather than both-and. Having > relevant media to support professional development is necessary. However, it > seems rather too easy to end up with a cultural reduction toward the > technological means rather than the ends (and thus we end up

Re: [ppig-discuss] Rhetorical structure of code: Anyone interested in collaborating?

2016-05-02 Thread Huw Lloyd
Hi Raoul, No doubt it could be construed as either-or rather than both-and. Having relevant media to support professional development is necessary. However, it seems rather too easy to end up with a cultural reduction toward the technological means rather than the ends (and thus we end up

Re: [ppig-discuss] Rhetorical structure of code: Anyone interested in collaborating?

2016-04-29 Thread Dan Sumption
> > To me, a 1000-line module is a God Class. A 3000-line module is a complete >> disaster. >> >> Accepted best practice is that a file too big to view on your screen is >> too long. Optimum file size is probably under 30 lines. >> > Really? I've heard that said about *function* size, but not

Re: [ppig-discuss] Rhetorical structure of code: Anyone interested in collaborating?

2016-04-28 Thread Richard A. O'Keefe
On 28/04/16 7:15 PM, Dan Sumption wrote: This is a subject that interests me greatly, and I'm keen to hear people's views on it. My perspective is that of a working software developer (albeit with a background in psychology), not an academic. I have no experience of ML, and have worked

Re: [ppig-discuss] Rhetorical structure of code: Anyone interested in collaborating?

2016-04-28 Thread Mark Levison
I'm still a practitioner, to the extent a consultant can be. Visualations need to be derived from the code and not the annotations since I've never met a programmer who voluntary updated their JavaDoc or other annotation. I've seen literate code on rare occasions, mostly from teams doing

Re: [ppig-discuss] Rhetorical structure of code: Anyone interested in collaborating?

2016-04-27 Thread Flavius Aspra
Do you have any real-life example where complex stuff do not look like blobs? I'd start with this. On 28 Apr 2016 5:52 a.m., "Richard A. O'Keefe" wrote: > I've been thinking for some time of writing a paper with the > title "Why can't I see the structure?" based on the idea

Re: [ppig-discuss] Rhetorical structure of code: Anyone interested in collaborating?

2016-04-27 Thread Gergely Buday
I am not sure if it matters for you but how about Standard ML modules? - Gergely On Thursday, 28 April 2016, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote: > I've been thinking for some time of writing a paper with the > title "Why can't I see the structure?" based on the idea that > modules