Why him does not use a natural language for programming?
keith.clarke at clarkeandclarke.co.uk
Fri Feb 24 02:27:47 CST 2012
...indeed - gets me every time - why not 'the visibility of...' as a pseudonym
Non-ambiguous syntax can still be made to seem a tad more naturalistic if the correct usage is grammatically correct.
On 24 Feb 2012, at 08:19, Phil Jimmieson wrote:
> The one that always makes me have to think twice is
> if the visible of field "X" is true then
> Why not:
> if field "X" is visible then
> I usually start out by writing the latter and then remember it has to be the former...
> On 24 Feb 2012, at 07:47, Jerry Jensen wrote:
>> I think pseudo-natural language is as goofy as any other.
>> What you expect when you type into the msg box:
>> put me into it; put it
>> How about:
>> get me; put it
>> At least that one is a bit reassuring...
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> Phil Jimmieson phil at liverpool.ac.uk (UK) 0151 795 4236 (Mobile) 07976 983164
> Computer Science Dept., Liverpool University, Ashton Building, Ashton Street
> Liverpool L69 3BX http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~phil/
> I used to sit on a special medical board... ...but now I use this ointment.
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
More information about the use-livecode