3 ms·
I don't think we have to worry about "everyone" or even a small percentage thereof learning how to code. They won't. It's not that they can't, but it takes more
by joesmo 13y ago
I don't think we have to worry about "everyone" or even a small percentage thereof learning how to code. They won't. It's not that they can't, but it takes more than a couple of hours writing "Hello World" to do anything substantial and most people are not willing to put in the time, day after day, to learn anything substantial.
That being said, I can't imagine anything more human and more powerful than text. If I want to give instructions to a _human_, the best way I know of is to write them down as clearly as possible. If this works with a complex person, why would it not work with an incredibly simple (from an abstract point of view, not implementation) microprocessor. After all, all processors have an extremely limited set of instructions (even CISC ones).
This desire for something that is not text seems misplaced. After all, text is (IMO) certainly better than pairs of numbers indicating operation and data. Writing is one of the greatest human achievements. To dismiss it in favor of touch or something graphically visual is to disregard its power and superiority to both touch and visual systems of communication.
When designing a system, if I am able to give it commands in English (or any other language), this would be vastly superior to anything visual or touch based that I can think of or that the article specifies (or rather doesn't). To take the whole system of a language like English with its complex idea-expression engine and its vast array of words (1 million++) and discard it is ridiculous. Now, we are not currently programming in English, or anything even remotely close (though many languages' grammar follows from natural language somewhat), but I do believe this is, and has been for decades, a goal that may one day be achievable. This is desirable as humans are naturally inclined towards language and those who practice it can be incredibly good communicators (programmers of reality).
- VLM 13y ago"It's not that they can't" No, they really can't. Garbage in garbage out. Can't implement an algorithm or follow a protocol unless you understand it, and the world is full of people who literally don't understand how a thermostat works, how to drive safely, or how to implement the NRAs three basic rules of gun safety. Note that our shared enjoyment of text as per your 3rd paragraph is only politically correct WRT to programming... if you dare to suggest text might also be the superior user interface, the dogpile will begin. Which is sad. Closed minds are always weaker than open minds... Lets play a game, I'm thinking of a well designed, expressive, long lived programming language developed by a linguist... Its dumped on here at HN for no logical reason, just the usual womens fashion fad explanations. I suspect this would happen to any "English like" future programming language.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 13y ago"just the usual womens fashion fad explanations" Very classy, dude.
- boyaka 13y agoMen can be fashionable too, it's just typically not as fun for us. I would say most of the time the only reason men are interested in fashion is to become more attractive to women. Edit: I realize this kind of generalization probably offends people. I'm sorry, I just believe that men and women are fundamentally different from each other. Here's my google search findings on the topic: http://www.lloydianaspects.co.uk/evolve/fashion.html http://www.lloydianaspects.co.uk/evolve/fashion.html
- joesmo 13y agoI should have been more clear in my writing as I did not mean to suggest most people could program, but that even smart people with the potential to learn it (a very small percentage) generally are not interested in investing the time. I agree, text (reading and writing) is definitely a dying art, especially in America, although to me it seems to be part of the whole anti-intellectual culture brewing here and in other parts of the world. Perl?