3 ms·
Yep, so as I said the definition of things like "simple", "complex" are super vague. | but using different syntax when doing different things can make a lot of
by cttet 5y ago
Yep, so as I said the definition of things like "simple", "complex" are super vague.
| but using different syntax when doing different things can make a lot of sense.
For C users yes, if we step back a little bit, for English users yes, but for people with other language background it may not hold. Every pieces of added syntax will utilise some human priors that may be specific to someone. But some really minimal systems can be grasped by every background, albeit taking a very long time.
- Zababa 5y agoMy idea behind "make things that are different look different" doesn't come from language (at least not written language) but from visual media in general. For example, on a industrial machine or in a guide, people will often use lots of trick to distinguish some things from other. It isn't really syntax, but considering that programming is written text, we don't have much else than syntax to differentiate the parts on a quick read. I think that may be a bias due to how I read code. I tend to skim it quickly at first, and then read the "more interesting parts" on a second pass. On the other hand, if you read code linearly, syntax may not be as needed. I'd like to see a study on eye movement when reading code and language preference, that may help reveal some patterns (or not.).