4 ms·

So instead of having to learn English as a prerequisite to understand code bases, you propose that we learn a dozen or more different natural languages instead?

So instead of having to learn English as a prerequisite to understand code bases, you propose that we learn a dozen or more different natural languages instead? Can you imagine what it would be like if every library had to be released in N different translations? Sounds like an exceptionally bad idea. A huge step back for our field.

ubernostrum 8y ago
If you take the position that every codebase everywhere must be available to and understood by every programmer everywhere, sure, you have to settle on a common language. Luckily, I don't think anybody takes that position, or at least takes it seriously. But there are plenty of monolingual dev teams out there whose shared language isn't English and isn't written in ASCII. Why should they be forced to write code in English if nobody who works with it is an English speaker? I already regularly see people post questions to Stack Overflow and mailing lists and IRC where names of classes and functions and variables are ASCII but not English (i.e., someone writes a class called "Utilisateur", not "User"). Why not let them just use their language fully?
hyperpape 8y ago
This is a false dichotomy. English will continue to be the lingua franca of programming for the foreseeable future, and full professional competence will probably require being able to read APIs that are in English. However, for the sake of learners everywhere, it is important that it be possible to program using non-ascii identifiers. Asking a 10 year old who doesn't speak English to learn what "while" means is quite different from requiring their variables to be in a language they don't understand.
kazinator 8y ago
But ASCII is not English. If identifier are restricted to ASCII, then what that requires is romanization, not specifically English. char *speicher; // German for memory (define f (keizoku) ...) ; Japanese for continuation

ubernostrum 8y ago

If you take the position that every codebase everywhere must be available to and understood by every programmer everywhere, sure, you have to settle on a common language. Luckily, I don't think anybody takes that position, or at least takes it seriously. But there are plenty of monolingual dev teams out there whose shared language isn't English and isn't written in ASCII. Why should they be forced to write code in English if nobody who works with it is an English speaker? I already regularly see people post questions to Stack Overflow and mailing lists and IRC where names of classes and functions and variables are ASCII but not English (i.e., someone writes a class called "Utilisateur", not "User"). Why not let them just use their language fully?

hyperpape 8y ago

This is a false dichotomy. English will continue to be the lingua franca of programming for the foreseeable future, and full professional competence will probably require being able to read APIs that are in English. However, for the sake of learners everywhere, it is important that it be possible to program using non-ascii identifiers. Asking a 10 year old who doesn't speak English to learn what "while" means is quite different from requiring their variables to be in a language they don't understand.

kazinator 8y ago

But ASCII is not English. If identifier are restricted to ASCII, then what that requires is romanization, not specifically English. char *speicher; // German for memory (define f (keizoku) ...) ; Japanese for continuation