oh no! more natural language stuff! ack!
- Posted by Mike <mdeland at NWINFO.NET> Mar 29, 1998
- 826 views
Jaques wrote: >>No, Esperanto is no good for programming. >>No human language is good for programming. >>A programming language is not at all a "language" >>in the sense that English, Hebrew, Esperanto, Chinese, >>Indonesian, are languages. right...wrong....hrmmmmm.... cannae make up my mind here :) seriously, the point is that we make a "programming" language and a "natural" language....*the same* the problem is not that there isn't a "human" or "natural" language that is good for programming, it's that programming is no good for language. to wit: there is translation, versus, *comprehension* any half-baked programmer can take the dictionary and make a computer give a specified output for the input of any word in that dictionary. this is -not- IMHO the definition of "natural language programming" this is translation. translation without comprehension is as worthwile to us as it is to the UN interpreters and to any parent currently raising a child. you can hear the word "no", but what does that ***mean*** to you? to that child? does it mean "stop"? does it mean "you are forbidden"? does it mean "at some other point in time this might be permissible"? what is the difference between a baby going: "goo goo gaa gaaa blah goo gaaa blah gaa goo" and machine language for a computer? what is the difference? machine language makes perfect sense to a computer, just like goo goo gaa ga blah ga goo makes _perfect sense_ to that baby. they ***understand*** it. they give it *meaning* and interpret that meaning and act upon that meaning. now...all we need to do is expand that comprehension... not build translators...instead, we build .... ;) what? what do we build??? :) give up? simple :) interpreters in actuality, we need even better than interpreters. we need something that will allow the computer to create it's own set of interpretations defined by its environment in response to its associations which were created from other simple interpretations. sooooooooooooooooooo.... let's get to work ;) child's play. Mike -------------------------------------- If it wasn't for typos, I'd never get any coding done at all. ;)