Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If I were to invent a programming language for the 21st century

wordsandbuttons.online

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 184 posts

Re: If I were to invent a programming language for the 21st century

#131

Post by cm2187 »

crazygringo wrote: post #12

> Ultimately this: > FILE * test_file = fopen(“/tmp/test.txt”, “w+”); > Should become something like this: > create file /tmp/test.txt for input and output as test_file > Syntax highlighting should work instead of syntax notation just fine. I couldn't disagree more. The first example is easily scannable visually -- a variable is being created from a function call. I can tell because my eyes immediately notice the mid…

But are’t you describing familiarity rather than readability? Ask a non programmer if he thinks the syntax of c code feels logical and natural.

Re: If I were to invent a programming language for the 21st century

#132

Post by cm2187 »

cultus wrote: post #70
crazygringo wrote: post #12

> Ultimately this: > FILE * test_file = fopen(“/tmp/test.txt”, “w+”); > Should become something like this: > create file /tmp/test.txt for input and output as test_file > Syntax highlighting should work instead of syntax notation just fine. I couldn't disagree more. The first example is easily scannable visually -- a variable is being created from a function call. I can tell because my eyes immediately notice the mid…

Very much agree. Programming notation, like math, is supposed to be easy to convey exact meaning, unlike human language. Every attempt there has been to make code look like English hasn't worked out well. SQL, for example, is incredibly verbose, with complex syntax. This obscures what is otherwise very good semantics. I think this is why a lot of people hate writing queries.

I rather think Math is a good counter example. Or physics rather. There aren’t enough greek letters in the alphabet to satisfy the average academic paper. You first have to load in your memory the meaning of 20 different symbols then decypher a formula before you can process it.

Now people who read lots of papers are probably used to this exercise but that doesn’t mean it’s a good thing (you can get used to running on one leg, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t better ways to run!). I am of the opinion that initials, or full words should be used in formula.

Re: If I were to invent a programming language for the 21st century

#133

Post by red75prime »

cm2187 wrote: post #131
crazygringo wrote: post #12

> Ultimately this: > FILE * test_file = fopen(“/tmp/test.txt”, “w+”); > Should become something like this: > create file /tmp/test.txt for input and output as test_file > Syntax highlighting should work instead of syntax notation just fine. I couldn't disagree more. The first example is easily scannable visually -- a variable is being created from a function call. I can tell because my eyes immediately notice the mid…

But are’t you describing familiarity rather than readability? Ask a non programmer if he thinks the syntax of c code feels logical and natural.

Ask me if I think that the syntax of Chinese language feels..., well, like anything at all (punctuation marks are western influence).

Re: If I were to invent a programming language for the 21st century

#134

Post by cm2187 »

red75prime wrote: post #133
cm2187 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But are’t you describing familiarity rather than readability? Ask a non programmer if he thinks the syntax of c code feels logical and natural.

Ask me if I think that the syntax of Chinese language feels..., well, like anything at all (punctuation marks are western influence).

Yeah. But if you ask a VB or python programmer who never wrote in a c-style syntax, you will probably get the opposite opinion.

Re: If I were to invent a programming language for the 21st century

#136

Post by henrikeh »

dumbfoundded wrote: post #97
kens wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I were to invent a programming language for the 21st century, the main feature that would make people frown is that it would not be laid down in a flat text file. Yes! It drives me crazy that due to a historical accident, we're still essentially writing programs as decks of 80-column punch cards. Nowadays the decks are virtual and the editing tools are better, but languages really haven't evolved to take advanta…

I think that'd be useful for commenting but nothing else. Whenever I see something in code, I wonder, what does this do? If I started seeing bold and italics and it did nothing but draw attention, I would almost certainly feel it a distraction.

> I think that'd be useful for commenting but nothing else.

But isn’t that a good enough use case?

Almost nobody bothers to put proper formatting, diagrams, tables, formulas, references etc in their source code. At best we get ASCII approximations.

To see some examples of what it could be like look at Mathematica, Jupyter, literate programming, and org-babel.

Re: If I were to invent a programming language for the 21st century

#137

Post by scardine »

crazygringo wrote: post #12

> Ultimately this: > FILE * test_file = fopen(“/tmp/test.txt”, “w+”); > Should become something like this: > create file /tmp/test.txt for input and output as test_file > Syntax highlighting should work instead of syntax notation just fine. I couldn't disagree more. The first example is easily scannable visually -- a variable is being created from a function call. I can tell because my eyes immediately notice the mid…

Python's way is a good compromise IMHO:

    with open("/tmp/test.txt", "w+") as test_file:
        do_something_with(test_file)
And you get test_file closed for free at the end of the block.

Re: If I were to invent a programming language for the 21st century

#138

Post by fouc »

cultus wrote: post #70
crazygringo wrote: post #12

> Ultimately this: > FILE * test_file = fopen(“/tmp/test.txt”, “w+”); > Should become something like this: > create file /tmp/test.txt for input and output as test_file > Syntax highlighting should work instead of syntax notation just fine. I couldn't disagree more. The first example is easily scannable visually -- a variable is being created from a function call. I can tell because my eyes immediately notice the mid…

Very much agree. Programming notation, like math, is supposed to be easy to convey exact meaning, unlike human language. Every attempt there has been to make code look like English hasn't worked out well. SQL, for example, is incredibly verbose, with complex syntax. This obscures what is otherwise very good semantics. I think this is why a lot of people hate writing queries.

>Every attempt there has been to make code look like English hasn't worked out well

Not true. Ruby is incredibly readable

Re: If I were to invent a programming language for the 21st century

#139

Post by setr »

munchbunny wrote: post #87
crazygringo wrote: post #12

> Ultimately this: > FILE * test_file = fopen(“/tmp/test.txt”, “w+”); > Should become something like this: > create file /tmp/test.txt for input and output as test_file > Syntax highlighting should work instead of syntax notation just fine. I couldn't disagree more. The first example is easily scannable visually -- a variable is being created from a function call. I can tell because my eyes immediately notice the mid…

I think the goal in general should be to minimize conceptual depth and maximize predictability for the problem domain you are trying to address. I dislike the C style for several reasons: > FILE * test_file = fopen(“/tmp/test.txt”, “w+”); First, you have to understand the implications of it being a pointer, which includes the little warning light in your head about ownership and allocation/deallocation. Then you have…

>First, you have to understand the implications of it being a pointer, which includes the little warning light in your head about ownership and allocation/deallocation

Thats a semantic issue, not a syntax/style one. If your language has pointer semantics, you’d need to a way to access it with either proposed styles, and the same warning light should appear regardless.

The w+ example is much more relevant, as it could be expressed more clearly and well-defined (eg enum with full name). But all you could do with the pointer syntax is say FILE POINTER test_file, and gain nothing, because the “*” syntax isn’t at fault here

Re: If I were to invent a programming language for the 21st century

#140

Post by setr »

j2kun wrote: post #31
crazygringo wrote: post #12

> Ultimately this: > FILE * test_file = fopen(“/tmp/test.txt”, “w+”); > Should become something like this: > create file /tmp/test.txt for input and output as test_file > Syntax highlighting should work instead of syntax notation just fine. I couldn't disagree more. The first example is easily scannable visually -- a variable is being created from a function call. I can tell because my eyes immediately notice the mid…

Indeed, there's a reason that SQL statements still need formatting and keyword capitalization hints to make it readable.

What language doesn’t need formatting to be readable? Have you tried reading whitespace-stripped C/js?

And the caps hint is the same as syntax highlighting... its not even that useful if you have highlighting, but boy is it useful when you don’t

Post reply on HN