5 ms·

And yet he attacks elitism with his particular kind of elitism. I'm not sure this is at all useful. "Go get some more education at an institution other than a

by mrj 11y ago

And yet he attacks elitism with his particular kind of elitism. I'm not sure this is at all useful. "Go get some more education at an institution other than a glorified vocational training center."

brudgers 11y ago
I believe that "glorified vocational training center" is a self-depreciating reference to the author's home institution, MIT. I suspect that other members of the MIT community were the first order audience for the article and the thrust of his critique is that claims that HTML is not a programming language are structured as arguments from authority. What makes (print "Hello World") ; MIT/GNU Scheme a proper program, and <p>Hello World</p> something else seems more rooted in opinion than any intrinsic difference.
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  Well, one can be compiled to an independent binary that can load and run on a variety of machines. The other requires a large application infrastructure to run at all. Commonly they are lightyears apart. Its easy to see why one would be called a language and the other, not.
  - dllthomas 11y ago
    "[O]ne can be compiled to an independent binary that can load and run on a variety of machines. The other requires a large application infrastructure to run at all." That seems more a matter of current tooling, not anything about the languages themselves. Did Java only become a programming language when someone wrote a compiler to machine code? Is perl more in the same category as C or as HTML? Quite a few languages dynamically link a runtime, and most are dependent on OS facilities that could be extended to handle HTML.
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      HTML will never run standalone, right? Its designed to run in a very rich environment.
      - dllthomas 11y ago
        I don't see the environment for an HTML page being richer, in any sense at all, then the environment for a Java program. Especially if we are not considering javascript to be a part of html. To be clear, I emphatically agree that html is not a programming language, I just don't think this is getting at why.
        JoeAltmaier 11y ago
        I wonder if its something like the arguments for why humans are different from animals (e.g. opposable thumb; tool maker; language). We keep casting about for things; they keep getting disproved. Maybe its not a worthwhile categorization.
        dllthomas 11y ago
        My view is that HTML is not a "programming language" because it was not designed for programming, and isn't very good at it. C isn't a markup language because it wasn't designed for adding presentational and organizational context to information, and it isn't very good at it. Some markup languages let you do some programming, and vice-versa. There are also some candidates for being considered both a programming language and a markup language. HTML, absent js, doesn't seem to be one of these.
        JoeAltmaier 11y ago
        But that's circular, right? HTML isn't a programming language, because you can't program. Maybe its like pornography; you know it when you see it.
        dllthomas 11y ago
- eurleif 11y ago
  How about this for an intrinsic difference: one language is capable of performing arbitrary computations (it's Turing complete), and the other is not?
  - halosghost 11y ago
    The only problem with that is that, recently, there has been a resurgence of the notion of sub-turing complete languages as still being valid programming pursuits. E.g., see Coq. I have not really come down on one side or the other (mainly because I do not have the requisite experience and have not yet had the time to research the question thoroughly enough to form a well-founded opinion). But, that programming languages must be Turing complete is not necessarily a given.
    - brudgers 11y ago
      The classification of Coq versus HTML is like that of classifying people as expats versus migrants, it reflects more upon the affinity of the person classifying for what is being classified than upon any objective distinction. Computer Scientists use Coq and Web Designers use HTML. Denying HTML is a programming language is a mechanism for denying a particular form of legitimacy to a particular cluster of activities. It's not like you're average Java programmer could actually prove that Java is Turing Complete in polynomial time. Most people take it on authority that C is Turing Complete, and that's reasonable because that's the way science largely works.
      - halosghost 11y ago
        It feels like you may have misunderstood my purpose. My point was not that HTML should be denigrated from the status of programming language where Coq is a programming language. My point was that the line is blurry (I think you and I agree on this), and that it is not a given that a “programming language” is necessarily Turing complete.
        brudgers 11y ago
        It feels like you may have considered my reply an argument rather than a riff on your observation that Coq gets props as a programming language. When I see a programming language that comes with an infinite tape, I'll take the idea of Turing Completeness as a necessary condition for a programming language more seriously. My point is that excluding HTML from the family of programming languages is a social distinction. And mentioning Turing Completeness is usually a way of cutting off conversation not opening it up.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- dllthomas 11y ago
  I think the issue here is that it's quite possible (if often inconvenient) to use a programming language for markup. If it's good at that, I might call it a programming and markup language. I would only call it a programming language if it is good at defining meaningful computation and/or sequencing actions.

by mrj 11y ago

And yet he attacks elitism with his particular kind of elitism. I'm not sure this is at all useful. "Go get some more education at an institution other than a glorified vocational training center."

brudgers 11y ago

I believe that "glorified vocational training center" is a self-depreciating reference to the author's home institution, MIT. I suspect that other members of the MIT community were the first order audience for the article and the thrust of his critique is that claims that HTML is not a programming language are structured as arguments from authority. What makes (print "Hello World") ; MIT/GNU Scheme a proper program, and <p>Hello World</p> something else seems more rooted in opinion than any intrinsic difference.

JoeAltmaier 11y ago
Well, one can be compiled to an independent binary that can load and run on a variety of machines. The other requires a large application infrastructure to run at all. Commonly they are lightyears apart. Its easy to see why one would be called a language and the other, not.
- dllthomas 11y ago
  "[O]ne can be compiled to an independent binary that can load and run on a variety of machines. The other requires a large application infrastructure to run at all." That seems more a matter of current tooling, not anything about the languages themselves. Did Java only become a programming language when someone wrote a compiler to machine code? Is perl more in the same category as C or as HTML? Quite a few languages dynamically link a runtime, and most are dependent on OS facilities that could be extended to handle HTML.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    HTML will never run standalone, right? Its designed to run in a very rich environment.
    - dllthomas 11y ago
      I don't see the environment for an HTML page being richer, in any sense at all, then the environment for a Java program. Especially if we are not considering javascript to be a part of html. To be clear, I emphatically agree that html is not a programming language, I just don't think this is getting at why.
      - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
        I wonder if its something like the arguments for why humans are different from animals (e.g. opposable thumb; tool maker; language). We keep casting about for things; they keep getting disproved. Maybe its not a worthwhile categorization.
        dllthomas 11y ago
        My view is that HTML is not a "programming language" because it was not designed for programming, and isn't very good at it. C isn't a markup language because it wasn't designed for adding presentational and organizational context to information, and it isn't very good at it. Some markup languages let you do some programming, and vice-versa. There are also some candidates for being considered both a programming language and a markup language. HTML, absent js, doesn't seem to be one of these.
        JoeAltmaier 11y ago
        But that's circular, right? HTML isn't a programming language, because you can't program. Maybe its like pornography; you know it when you see it.
        dllthomas 11y ago
eurleif 11y ago
How about this for an intrinsic difference: one language is capable of performing arbitrary computations (it's Turing complete), and the other is not?
- halosghost 11y ago
  The only problem with that is that, recently, there has been a resurgence of the notion of sub-turing complete languages as still being valid programming pursuits. E.g., see Coq. I have not really come down on one side or the other (mainly because I do not have the requisite experience and have not yet had the time to research the question thoroughly enough to form a well-founded opinion). But, that programming languages must be Turing complete is not necessarily a given.
  - brudgers 11y ago
    The classification of Coq versus HTML is like that of classifying people as expats versus migrants, it reflects more upon the affinity of the person classifying for what is being classified than upon any objective distinction. Computer Scientists use Coq and Web Designers use HTML. Denying HTML is a programming language is a mechanism for denying a particular form of legitimacy to a particular cluster of activities. It's not like you're average Java programmer could actually prove that Java is Turing Complete in polynomial time. Most people take it on authority that C is Turing Complete, and that's reasonable because that's the way science largely works.
    - halosghost 11y ago
      It feels like you may have misunderstood my purpose. My point was not that HTML should be denigrated from the status of programming language where Coq is a programming language. My point was that the line is blurry (I think you and I agree on this), and that it is not a given that a “programming language” is necessarily Turing complete.
      - brudgers 11y ago
        It feels like you may have considered my reply an argument rather than a riff on your observation that Coq gets props as a programming language. When I see a programming language that comes with an infinite tape, I'll take the idea of Turing Completeness as a necessary condition for a programming language more seriously. My point is that excluding HTML from the family of programming languages is a social distinction. And mentioning Turing Completeness is usually a way of cutting off conversation not opening it up.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
dllthomas 11y ago
I think the issue here is that it's quite possible (if often inconvenient) to use a programming language for markup. If it's good at that, I might call it a programming and markup language. I would only call it a programming language if it is good at defining meaningful computation and/or sequencing actions.