3 ms·

Programming languages generally don't have semantics that include claims about the physical world.

• barrkel 16y ago
  Ink scratches on wood pulp don't have semantics either; it's the interpreter - i.e. the reader - that imbues them with semantics. Similarly, programs manipulate symbols. It's up to the person who runs the program to imbue those symbols with meaning. F=ma; that's some coloured pixels on your screen. It's also an expression of one of the laws of Newtonian mechanics. It can be used to calculate the approximate acceleration of a mass after a particular force has been applied to it. But the coloured pixels on your screen isn't doing that; you need to apply your mind. Similarly, here's a function: function calc_a(m, F) { return F / m; } That might be part of a program which calculates the acceleration due to a force. It's also just a series of bytes, which, when interpreted by a translator, will ultimately shuffle bits of electrical state around a very complex circuit. You still need to apply your mind to give it meaning.
  • shasta 16y ago
    It sounds like we agree - programs aren't theories. Something else is required that relates the program to the real world. Note: you could have a programming language whose semantics specify a proposed relationship to reality, just as we posit such relationships in natural language. But most programming languages don't allow such things.