Why him does not use a natural language for programming?
dave.cragg at lacscentre.co.uk
Thu Feb 23 17:38:07 CST 2012
I may have misunderstood him too. But I interpreted the second video in the context of a teacher having run through the students' first programming lesson (in this case Python), and then asking generally, "so why do we have to learn a computer language rather than use a language we already know such as English or Mandarin?". And the answer - perhaps badly illustrated - computers need to be given unambiguous instructions. In a Livecode context, we might ask why we have to write "on mouseUp" and not "on mouseClick" (or why not " when the mouse is clicked")
So I took his point to be that computer languages are different from human languages.
On 23 Feb 2012, at 23:15, Bob Sneidar wrote:
> I may have misunderstood him then. I am not sure what the distinction between English-like and natural English programming languages is however. Give me an example of a natural english programming language if you please. I have not ever heard of anything except hypertext based languages, because the consensus was waaay back in the day that you could only go so far to make a programming language like a spoken one before all kinds of problems enter in. It has been my understanding that Hypertalk and it's derivatives is as far as it has gone. It also seemed to me that he was making the case that languages like the one Livecode uses are inferior to Python and not to be considered because they are too arbitrary. Again, I may have misunderstood him.
More information about the use-livecode