SCJP 1.4, SCWCD 1.4 - Hints for you, Certified Scrum Master
Did a rm -R / to find out that I lost my entire Linux installation!
SCEA part I,TOGAF Foundation
SCJP 1.4, SCWCD 1.4 - Hints for you, Certified Scrum Master
Did a rm -R / to find out that I lost my entire Linux installation!
Even if it happens, would you like to maintain/debug such a code? Considering the nuances that english language has, you can think of the headache it can become.
Moreover, i think learning english language completely is tougher than learning JAVA or other language. Imagine a situation where in you are reading a code(uhmm essay) of a guy who knows very good english!!!
[ November 28, 2007: Message edited by: Nitesh Kant ]
apigee, a better way to API!
candygrammar
A programming-language grammar that is mostly syntactic sugar; the term is also a play on `candygram'. COBOL, Apple's Hypertalk language, and a lot of the so-called `4GL' database languages share this property. The usual intent of such designs is that they be as English-like as possible, on the theory that they will then be easier for unskilled people to program. This intention comes to grief on the reality that syntax isn't what makes programming hard; it's the mental effort and organization required to specify an algorithm precisely that costs. Thus the invariable result is that `candygrammar' languages are just as difficult to program in as terser ones, and far more painful for the experienced hacker.
Regards Pete
But that's not what we're talking about. He's asking about a language in which you write in imprecise, ambiguous English, and the compiler figures out what the writer meant to ask for (or better yet, what the programmer should have intended for the computer to do.Originally posted by Peter Rooke:
Ever heard of the term CandyGrammar?
"Proposed Additions to the PDP-11 Instruction Set"
It included such candidates as:
BBW - branch both ways
BEW - branch either way
D0CF - divide by 0 then catch fire
and of course,
DMNS - do what I mean, not what I say
Spot false dilemmas now, ask me how!
(If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much room.)
In terms of programming, I believe in the KISS principle. But English (and most natural languages) are more of the KISS MY A**.
Originally posted by Jothi Shankar Kumar Sankararaj:
"loop through this 10 times and print on the screen..." something like this...
There would still have to be some rigid standards on how the English should be structured. As everyone is saying, human language is fuzzy. Half the time we don't understand each other, so why should we expect a computer to be any different? And even if the computer happens to understand what you intended, who's to say that the next human to read your "code" interprets it correctly? Ever have someone explain something to you but you weren't sure of what was really intended?
For example:
A: "Go two more lights and then turn left."
B: "Wait, do you mean I should turn left at the second light?"
A: "No, take the first left after the light."
If you're simply looking for a way to code more like English, you should Google for stuff on Domain Specific Languages (DSLs), which are fairly popular with scripting languages. For instance, your loop statement could be written similar to 10.times{ print "something" } in some languages.
A good workman is known by his tools.
SCJP 1.4, SCWCD 1.4 - Hints for you, Certified Scrum Master
Did a rm -R / to find out that I lost my entire Linux installation!
Dont you think BPEL is taking us that way?
Being XML, and not linear in its flow, I don't think any non-trivial BPEL process is easily readable.
By the way, what is BPEL?
BPEL and Java introduction
