English Like?

[Mark Waddingham]

Hehe - what an enjoyable post to read - I couldn't resist 'biting'
on a few things though ;)

On 2017-05-24 17:57, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode wrote:
> Probably most of those programmers (like many well-established
> LiveCode programmers) have invested so much time and effort
> in learning the high level language(s) they already use that they are
> unlikely to switch.

But if we can make them switch, that benefits LiveCode as a whole.

> From a marketing point of view I believe that this question is more
> pressing than the other one, just because people new to coding have
> not got stuck in the groove of a particulalr programming language.

This is partly true - however, 'no man is an island', people develop
preconceptions about things over time which influence the choices in
the future.

I think it would be fair to say there might well be some sort of general
'meme' which floats around with regards to 'English-like' languages
and not necessarily a positive one.

Ergo - someone who has never been a programmer, who perhaps is thinking
of dabbling, might get put off by LiveCode because of its language, just
because they have that 'meme' embedded in that psyche without even 
trying
it properly.

> What does need to be born in mind is that most of LiveCode's installed
> user-base like their pudding the way LiveCode serves,
> and changing the recipe to attract other people might only serve to
> alienate current users rather than attarct others;
> probably not worth the risk.

So we must make sure that the 'pudding' our current user-base isn't
diluted in the process. Most companies might start out producing only 
one
kind of 'pudding', but if they never diversify they risk ceasing to be 
at some
point when some other company produces 'pudding+' which people like 
better;
or if they can no longer produce 'pudding' because some 'nanny' decides 
that
a key ingredient should not be allowed anymore for the health of all.

Having all your eggs in one basket is a little risky...

> My school now runs at exactly the size I want it to; those 'factories'
> still run. Nobody, as far as I can tell, feels threatened by my
> operation,
> and I don't feel threatened by them. This is because, although we all
> "sell" English as a Foreign Language, we do it in different ways; and
> the children who come to my school are quite unlike those who go to
> the other ones (which suits me 100%). There is room in the
> multiverse of EFL for a variety of products.

It is great that you've reached a 'steady state' with your EFL school :)

However, it is perhaps fair to say that the world of EFL teaching does
not move at quite the same rate as the world of computers, there are 
lots
of very large 'pudding behemoths' out there who care not one whit for 
small
'pudding' manufacturers - and quite often trample them under foot 
without
a moment's thought.

I would also conjecture that the infrastructure requirements for our
particular kind of 'pudding' are somewhat larger than for a single
successful EFL school - and when combined with the fast paced 
environment
our 'pudding' is couched in, one needs to be careful that one can 
support
one's 'pudding' manufacture now and into the long term future.

> No: a lot of the syntax isn't English-like, and the claims that have
> been flying around about that ever since HyperCard seem almost
> as crook as the "programming is easy" porky.

I agree with the statement that 'programming is easy' in general is a 
bit of a porky.

Most things are not easy when you get below a certain depth (kind of a 
tautology,
easy things generally being quite shallow in any domain).

However, I am firmly in the belief that many of the reasons why it is 
not 'easy'
right now are not because they could not be easier, but because like 
most
industries there is a huge inertia with how things are currently done 
and
when you are in the midst of doing something, you have to get it done, 
and perhaps
thinking about 'how to make it easier' is a distant thought.

In general I'd like to think that LiveCode does make some things easier 
than
other languages - and, in general, it is going in the right direction.

<insert tongue into cheek>
In regards to 'English-like' - then well let's just say LiveCode is 
'fibbidy-dab'
if 'English-like' is considered too inaccurate. In comparison with 
pretty much
ever other programming language which exists today and is still 
maintained,
I'd say LiveCode is significantly more 'English-like' than any of them 
thus
justifying its tag of 'English-like' ;)
<removes tongue from cheek>

> "Intuitive" . . . ha, ha, ha. Human languages are not intuitive:
> otherwise we'd all be learning a new language every 3 or 4 weeks
> and the Tower of Babel wouldn't look like Trump Tower!

Indeed - human languages have evolved organically - but they have some
nice properties which most programming languages do not (particularly
in terms of how they reflect, at least in some part, how our brains
would appear to work - being something which has resulted from our 
brains
rather than the other way round).

At the end of the day computers dislike ambiguity intensely - yet 
ambiguity
is almost a principal part of natural language (automatically resolved 
in our
brain by context and experience).

So ideally we want a programming language which is intuitive - which we 
have
a fair stab at achieving because they have to be unambiguous.

I'd say that even being a little bit 'English-like' might help in this 
regard,
although you do have to dump a whole heap of compromise into such 
thing's design
to pass the 'unambiguous' requirement.

Warmest Regards,

Mark.

-- 
Mark Waddingham ~ mark at livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps