Re: simple vs complex languages

Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile@starynkevitch.net> wrote:


> I agree with Ralph and the original poster, but there is one
> additional point about computer languages: they are still, like in
> the 1950's, plain textual files. Of course, every language has its
> syntax and semantics, but we still are using editors, and more
> importantly, the model of sources files, conceptually the same as
> punched card decks!


I would say that is because languages are still rooted in the 50's
concept of serial execution of little steps of computation, for which
plain text is an effective representation. I have a suspicion that
most people asking for 'fancy editors' are in fact asking for a way to
make programming easier, but that is a completely different problem
than the representation of the programs themselves.


In other words: unless we develop and use programming languages with
concepts not suitably expressable through plain text, there is not
much need to go beyond editing of plain text files.


Furthermore, even writing a good plain-text editor is _hard_, as every
victim of a sub-standard IDE editor can attest. Developing a good
non-textual editor won't be any easier.

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.