From: [Jongware] on
Walter Banks wrote:
>
> Defining goals at a much higher level than C opens the possibilities
> for automating algorithmic choices at the function level.

Aha -- wouldn't the logical end point be a programming language where
you type "word processor", save it as source, compile, and have a word
processor?

When programming I often have "do what I mean, don't do what I program
you to" problems. This tool would surely solve it -- if you can write
down what you /mean/.

[Jongware]
From: dj3vande on
In article <4b4def88$0$22938$e4fe514c(a)news.xs4all.nl>,
[Jongware] <sorry(a)no.spam.net> wrote:
>Walter Banks wrote:
>>
>> Defining goals at a much higher level than C opens the possibilities
>> for automating algorithmic choices at the function level.
>
>Aha -- wouldn't the logical end point be a programming language where
>you type "word processor", save it as source, compile, and have a word
>processor?

Why bother to compile it? Just have it interpret on-the-fly.
That way you could even run it in interactive mode, and it's
sufficiently high-level that even non-programmers could usefully use
it.

Unix people call this a "shell".


dave

--
Dave Vandervies dj3vande at eskimo dot com
They've figured out how to get a 640x480 display into a phone by now, now
they're working on getting them back down to a reasonable size.
--Dave Brown in the scary devil monastery
From: Walter Banks on


dj3vande(a)csclub.uwaterloo.ca.invalid wrote:

> Why bother to compile it? Just have it interpret on-the-fly.
> That way you could even run it in interactive mode, and it's
> sufficiently high-level that even non-programmers could usefully use
> it.

Dave,

There are languages like that. LOGO for example is a functional
language that is capable of interactively solving some very tough
problems.

After some applications are developed a stable runnable version
of the application is desired including changing the format of the
solution to prevent changes.

Regards,

--
Walter Banks
Byte Craft Limited
http://www.bytecraft.com






From: Keith Thompson on
"[Jongware]" <sorry(a)no.spam.net> writes:
> Walter Banks wrote:
>> Defining goals at a much higher level than C opens the possibilities
>> for automating algorithmic choices at the function level.
>
> Aha -- wouldn't the logical end point be a programming language where
> you type "word processor", save it as source, compile, and have a word
> processor?

The result would be something that does to words what a food processor
does to food.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u(a)mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: reboot
Next: libpcap and pcap_inject()