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

Non-English-based programming languages

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 228 posts

Re: Non-English-based programming languages

#61

Post by pasabagi »

jacobolus wrote: post #58
pasabagi wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>which has no lower case This is exactly what bothers me. Why no lower case? Why not no upper case? You'd need the same number of keys, and it would be more legible. It would use the same amount of space.

Take it up with Émile Baudot? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baudot_code

I feel when something becomes so ubiquitous, even though it's obviously inferior, it takes a bit more push than one patent - especially if the patent is mainly about encoding, and barely incidentally about typography. And I don't think it's the case that nobody knew capitals were hard on the eyes. The whole reason why lower case letters exist is because roman allcapswithnospaces are horrible.

Re: Non-English-based programming languages

#62

Post by Stratoscope »

jacobolus wrote: post #50
pasabagi wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember the english associations of programming words being pretty confusing, to be honest. Generic, for instance, means a standard or non-descript object. Abstract, for another, means something without concrete existence. Static means something that doesn't move, or electrostatic charge. Void is a pretty archaic/unusual word for a space. All these things are a little bit like how they are used in programming lang…

These are all somewhat sloppy versions of the definitions of these words in common use. “Generic”, “general”, “generalize” and “specific”, “special”, “specify”, etc. all come from the relation between “species” and “genus”, where genus is a larger category containing a species. The use of these in a programming context is not too far removed from the same usage in non-technical conversation or in (non-biology) techni…

> Morse code, which has no lower case.

Sure, but Morse code doesn't have upper case either. It doesn't have case! It just has one set of letters and numbers and punctuation marks, it doesn't specify what case the letters should be represented in when they are not written in Morse code.

In my own case (pun intended) I used to copy Morse code by writing it down in my own weird mix of lowercase letters and semi-cursive writing.

Re: Non-English-based programming languages

#63

Post by toast0 »

pasabagi wrote: post #54
jacobolus wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are all somewhat sloppy versions of the definitions of these words in common use. “Generic”, “general”, “generalize” and “specific”, “special”, “specify”, etc. all come from the relation between “species” and “genus”, where genus is a larger category containing a species. The use of these in a programming context is not too far removed from the same usage in non-technical conversation or in (non-biology) techni…

>which has no lower case This is exactly what bothers me. Why no lower case? Why not no upper case? You'd need the same number of keys, and it would be more legible. It would use the same amount of space.

All caps means no ascenders or descenders, so actually less vertical space per line.

Re: Non-English-based programming languages

#64

Post by aasasd »

jnurmine wrote: post #33

The Wikipedia list does not mention Tampio, an OO language where programs are written in proper Finnish: https://github.com/fergusq/tampio As an example, here is kertoma.itp (an example routine to calculate a factorial): Pienen luvun kertoma on riippuen siitä, onko se pienempi tai yhtä suuri kuin yksi, joko yksi tai pieni luku kerrottuna pienen luvun edeltäjän kertomalla. Luvun edeltäjä on se vähennettynä yhdellä. Ol…

Among natural-looking programming languages, my favorite currently is ArnoldC: https://github.com/lhartikk/ArnoldC

https://i.imgur.com/XGB5oLG.jpg

Re: Non-English-based programming languages

#65

Post by pjc50 »

pasabagi wrote: post #54
jacobolus wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are all somewhat sloppy versions of the definitions of these words in common use. “Generic”, “general”, “generalize” and “specific”, “special”, “specify”, etc. all come from the relation between “species” and “genus”, where genus is a larger category containing a species. The use of these in a programming context is not too far removed from the same usage in non-technical conversation or in (non-biology) techni…

>which has no lower case This is exactly what bothers me. Why no lower case? Why not no upper case? You'd need the same number of keys, and it would be more legible. It would use the same amount of space.

The explanation I've always heard was that writing "god" with a lowercase G would have been unacceptable in the 1850s. To a lesser extent, writing personal names without a capital is still seen as a bit odd and potentially an insult.

Re: Non-English-based programming languages

#68

Post by mdup »

mauvehaus wrote: post #36
aasasd wrote: post #24

Seeing a programming language in your native language after working with English ones, you discover that it looks and sounds pretty ridiculous. My belief is that the native language is ingrained on a low level in the brain, so it's decoded ‘in the hardware’ and directly invokes meanings and associations, whereas a second language goes through at least some level of conscious processing. The very same way, I'm physica…

Many years ago, in elementary/primary school I went to a computer camp when I was living in Belgium. We used Logo in French on Macs. I don't remember much, but the keyword for random was 'hazard'. My experience was actually not bad; I didn't have any trouble associating the words with the abstract concepts involved in sending the turtle around the screen. I was doing fairly simplistic stuff though, I'll concede. I wo…

Probably it was the false friend "hasard" which, in French, means: chance, randomness.

Re: Non-English-based programming languages

#69

Post by jacobolus »

pasabagi wrote: post #61
jacobolus wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take it up with Émile Baudot? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baudot_code

I feel when something becomes so ubiquitous, even though it's obviously inferior, it takes a bit more push than one patent - especially if the patent is mainly about encoding, and barely incidentally about typography. And I don't think it's the case that nobody knew capitals were hard on the eyes. The whole reason why lower case letters exist is because roman allcapswithnospaces are horrible.

The people doing professional book design or handwriting long letters and the people designing systems for transmitting occasional short messages long distances had different priorities.

A telegram is a short enough message that being hard to read isn’t really a bottleneck. If it costs a day’s wages to send a couple sentences, the recipient is going to be able to spend a couple minutes on figuring out what it says. People weren’t sending novels around by telegraph.

Post reply on HN