7 ms·
From what I've understood, Randomo and Quorum's syntaxes share the same structure. Only keywords and operators changed. Therefore, Randomo has a much better s
by loup-vaillant 15y ago
From what I've understood, Randomo and Quorum's syntaxes share the same structure. Only keywords and operators changed. Therefore, Randomo has a much better structure than what we could expect from a truly randomly generated language.
So, while it still looks pretty bad for Perl, I'd say it's not that bad.
- Mithaldu 15y agoIt doesn't look bad for Perl at all, because the entire setup of this study is flawed to the point of making the conclusion a non sequitur.
- jessedhillon 15y agoIt always amazes me when people can dismiss academic papers -- the result of (at least) several weeks of work -- with a glib comment uttered anonymously, and no support given. Have you read the study? If not, you can find it here: http://www.cs.siue.edu/~astefik/papers/StefikPlateau2011.pdf http://www.cs.siue.edu/~astefik/papers/StefikPlateau2011.pdf
- Mithaldu 15y agoI have read the study which is why i made that comment. In fact, i've even contacted the author to gain more details about how they selected code samples to serve as learning aids and how all the other code samples looked like. Additionally, i am not anonymous. Google my name and you will find all about me, including, if you look for longer than a minute, my full name and address. Lastly, there was no need to give support in that comment by repeating what others and myself have said copiously all over the comments here. This was my main post towards that. Feel free to argue it: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3153249 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3153249