3 ms·

This is hardly surprising. The only reason "programming languages" are called that is because early computer scientists borrowed from linguistics research at th

This is hardly surprising. The only reason "programming languages" are called that is because early computer scientists borrowed from linguistics research at the time which defined language as a set of strings. Programming is general purpose problem solving, the fact that it is expressed in mostly English words is arbitrary e.g. Brainf*ck.

sosodev 6y ago
Seems like a weird conclusion to draw. If programming languages are arbitrary why didn’t we stop abstracting or creating new ones? The language is often a reflection of the problem it was intended to solve. Would you really argue that Brainfuck can solve your problems just as well as Python?
- uncomputation 6y ago
  Not that programming languages are arbitrary, but that the choice to use words (Python) rather than, say, punctuation (Brainfck) or emojis is because is easier for our human brains, thus arbitrary. But the task at hand is still problem solving, not language processing (at least not in the capacity of a typical conversation). I think a good example of this is the popularity of code visualizers. The only thing stopping Brainfck from solving your problems as easily as Python is the ease of human understanding, not some fundamental property of Python being more “language-like.”
  - sosodev 6y ago
    That’s not what arbitrary means. If we make languages in a certain way because it’s easier for our brains then it isn’t arbitrary by definition.
imtringued 6y ago
It's irrelevant how a language is implemented. Math notation is also a language and it barely uses any English words. I don't see meaningful differences between languages whether they are computer languages, human languages, math notation, except how the human brain processes them. >linguistics research at the time which defined language as a set of strings. Fundamentally there is nothing wrong with that. You can have trivial languages that follow simple rules. In practice humans tend to use more complicated languages but that is just their personal and cultural preference. People here are too hung up the message that is being communicated rather than the general idea of language as a communication method. Programming languages usually express algorithms and trigger logical sections of the brain but nothing prevents you from using a human language to express the same algorithm and trigger the same sections of the brain. The reason why people associate programming languages with logical thinking is that they were exclusively designed to communicate logic and nothing else.

sosodev 6y ago

Seems like a weird conclusion to draw. If programming languages are arbitrary why didn’t we stop abstracting or creating new ones? The language is often a reflection of the problem it was intended to solve. Would you really argue that Brainfuck can solve your problems just as well as Python?

uncomputation 6y ago
Not that programming languages are arbitrary, but that the choice to use words (Python) rather than, say, punctuation (Brainfck) or emojis is because is easier for our human brains, thus arbitrary. But the task at hand is still problem solving, not language processing (at least not in the capacity of a typical conversation). I think a good example of this is the popularity of code visualizers. The only thing stopping Brainfck from solving your problems as easily as Python is the ease of human understanding, not some fundamental property of Python being more “language-like.”
- sosodev 6y ago
  That’s not what arbitrary means. If we make languages in a certain way because it’s easier for our brains then it isn’t arbitrary by definition.

imtringued 6y ago

It's irrelevant how a language is implemented. Math notation is also a language and it barely uses any English words. I don't see meaningful differences between languages whether they are computer languages, human languages, math notation, except how the human brain processes them. >linguistics research at the time which defined language as a set of strings. Fundamentally there is nothing wrong with that. You can have trivial languages that follow simple rules. In practice humans tend to use more complicated languages but that is just their personal and cultural preference. People here are too hung up the message that is being communicated rather than the general idea of language as a communication method. Programming languages usually express algorithms and trigger logical sections of the brain but nothing prevents you from using a human language to express the same algorithm and trigger the same sections of the brain. The reason why people associate programming languages with logical thinking is that they were exclusively designed to communicate logic and nothing else.