3 ms·

I think the comparison is quite apt. Shakespearean English is an ancestor of today's English, much like assembly languages are the ancestors of today's language

I think the comparison is quite apt. Shakespearean English is an ancestor of today's English, much like assembly languages are the ancestors of today's languages. Shakespearean English is grammatically correct, much like this assembly code is, presumably, correct in doing what it needs to do. And, most pertinent, almost nobody speaks in Shakespearean English, and fewer and fewer people are comfortable working with it, much like assembly language.

BookmarkSaver 9y ago
I don't think it addresses one of the most important aspect of assembly, though, which is it's strict, functional/feature inferiority to modern languages. It isn't just old and forgotten, its very style and function is extremely limited in comparison. Shakespearean English is just about as functional of a language as modern English (ignoring the vocabulary for things that didn't exist back then), which can't be said about assembly.
- s73v3r_ 9y ago
  "I don't think it addresses one of the most important aspect of assembly, though, which is it's strict, functional/feature inferiority to modern languages." I think that's addressed in the, "No one really uses it anymore" part. "Shakespearean English is just about as functional of a language as modern English (ignoring the vocabulary for things that didn't exist back then), which can't be said about assembly." I would disagree. Arguably, the main function, if not the only function of English, or any other human language, is to express ideas. Shakespearean English being not commonly used, and many of the colloquialisms and terms used not being in use anymore would make that function more difficult. As an example, I'd use the "Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?" line. To most people, that would be Juliet asking where Romeo was, but it's not. It's her asking why Romeo had to be who he was, which was a Montague, the rival/enemy of her family.

BookmarkSaver 9y ago

I don't think it addresses one of the most important aspect of assembly, though, which is it's strict, functional/feature inferiority to modern languages. It isn't just old and forgotten, its very style and function is extremely limited in comparison. Shakespearean English is just about as functional of a language as modern English (ignoring the vocabulary for things that didn't exist back then), which can't be said about assembly.

s73v3r_ 9y ago
"I don't think it addresses one of the most important aspect of assembly, though, which is it's strict, functional/feature inferiority to modern languages." I think that's addressed in the, "No one really uses it anymore" part. "Shakespearean English is just about as functional of a language as modern English (ignoring the vocabulary for things that didn't exist back then), which can't be said about assembly." I would disagree. Arguably, the main function, if not the only function of English, or any other human language, is to express ideas. Shakespearean English being not commonly used, and many of the colloquialisms and terms used not being in use anymore would make that function more difficult. As an example, I'd use the "Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?" line. To most people, that would be Juliet asking where Romeo was, but it's not. It's her asking why Romeo had to be who he was, which was a Montague, the rival/enemy of her family.