OT: Is there a more English-like Programming language than Transcript?

[Dar Scott]

On Aug 12, 2006, at 1:37 AM, Richmond Mathewson wrote:

> To manipulated computers via a computer language requires an odd  
> sort of non-human logic which must be learnt by any would-be  
> programmer; and, while some languages attempt to obscure that,  
> without that nothing really effective gets done.

Perhaps that would-be human programmer is 90% along the path to that  
odd sort of logic because of human language.  Formal languages often  
have features of a human language.  Perhaps if natural languages were  
not recursive, only math wizards would use recursive languages.

I don't think that "obscure" is the right word.

Yeah, if we start to imagine the programming language as being  
English we will often do things that don't work.

However, there are aspects of a human language that programming  
languages including xTalk have.  (I hope I'm not considered heretical  
to say that even C has aspects of a human language.)  We tend to take  
these for granted.

English as a 2nd-person imperative syntax that works great for  
telling a computer what to do.  The verb comes first.

The meaning of a verb is augmented by other words.  The slot of these  
words is by syntax such as object and indirect object.  Nonlexical  
words are used to mark other players in augmenting the verb.

This fits in well in programming and if you squint, you can see a C  
function call doing this.

In some cases xTalk uses a form that uses a noun to tag the verb  
modifier.  We see this in some of the new encryption commands.  This  
is common in languages and is used somewhat in English.  "We took the  
last leg with Greg as driver."  This is used some in lisp dialects.   
(It might be cool to add this to custom commands.)

It seems xTalk has a more rigid syntax than expected.  I think this  
is because the assigned prepositions are not clear as to what role  
the augmenter is playing.

So, in this way the natural and the computerish are the same.

Another reminder:  Consider the tail recursion of object references.   
Those can be complex, but most humans have no problems with the  
complexity.  In most languages, this is natural and is processed  
quickly.

I do have problems with some word choices.  I can never remember  
"combine" or which way it goes.  The adding of "and" to syntax  
markers makes it a grouping "and" and not a logical "and" that it is  
everywhere else.  These little things add choices.

I think it is OK to augment xTalk with 8th grade math, or what should  
be in 8th grade math.

Dar