Re: Linugistics & COBOL design (was: Cobol AS/400 BNF Help Please
From: Robert Wagner (robert.deletethis_at_wagner.net)
Date: 07/20/04
- Next message: docdwarf_at_panix.com: "Re: Cobol AS/400 BNF Help Please"
- Previous message: Robert Wagner: "Re: In answer to RW - again (was: Sorts (revised)"
- In reply to: William M. Klein: "Linugistics & COBOL design (was: Cobol AS/400 BNF Help Please"
- Next in thread: docdwarf_at_panix.com: "Re: Cobol AS/400 BNF Help Please"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 10:00:59 GMT
You and Chuck work on the only major programming language where context
(semantics) determines meaning. Your interest in linguistics supports my point.
COBOL is renouned for being easy to read. The reason is it's similarity to a
natural language, English. Don't you think that has value?
"William M. Klein" <wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote:
>As someone with a college major in COBOL (and who worked on the COBOL Standards
>committee), I don't think there is any particular value in understanding how
>"natural" languages work when designing (especially enhancing an existing)
>programming or artificial language.
>
>My memory (and I could be mistaken in this) is that Chuck (also from J4) either
>had a degree or a minor in linguistics.
>
>Having said that, I can easily see how my background and interest in
>"theoretical" (rather than historical, etc) linguistics related to my initial
>interest in programming.
>
>--
>Bill Klein
> wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
>"Robert Wagner" <robert.deletethis@wagner.net> wrote in message
>news:40fc7805.29951463@news.optonline.net...
>> epc8@juno.com (E P Chandler) wrote:
>>
>> >Frederico Fonseca <real-email-in-msg-spam@email.com> wrote in message
>> news:<nj4of0tsaulqu6u82e1o5qmikj2st9oopg@4ax.com>...
>> >> On 19 Jul 2004 10:52:58 -0700, matteom@avanade.com (matteo) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Hi all,
>> >> >does anyone have a BNF grammar spec for Cobol AS/400?
>> >> >TIA
>> >> >Matteo
>> >> and what is a BNF
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Frederico Fonseca
>> >> ema il: frederico_fonseca at syssoft-int.com
>> >
>> >BNF is Backus-Naur Form which is one way of expressing the statements
>> >allowable in a programming language. Having a language specification
>> >in this form makes it easier to use automated compiler writing tools.
>> >
>> >Here is a URL but it's for VS Cobol II.
>> >
>> >http://www.cs.vu.nl/grammars/browsable/vs-cobol-ii/
>> >
>> >[My understanding is that COBOL is particularly difficult to parse
>> >because of its richness as a computer programming language, hence BNF
>> >or other "grammars" for COBOL are difficult to find.]
>>
>> That's because BNF strongly prefers languages that are 'context-free'. It
>> believes lexicon should do ALL the heavy lifting. Its ability to handle
syntax
>> is very limited.
>>
>> This preference has influenced all languages designed after roughly 1970.
It's
>> the reason why C has '==' as a relational operator, for instance.
>>
>> <troll alert> It seems to me that 'language designers' should know something
>> about linguistics. Knowledge of logic is inadequate. When challenged to name
a
>> famous linguist, most language designing computer scientists can name Chomsky
>> and no others. When asked to name his seminal work, they cannot come up with
>> Syntactic Structures. When asked about Bloomfield or Wittgenstein, they
return
>a
>> blank look.
>>
>> "In the land of he blind, the one-eyed man is king."
>
>
- Next message: docdwarf_at_panix.com: "Re: Cobol AS/400 BNF Help Please"
- Previous message: Robert Wagner: "Re: In answer to RW - again (was: Sorts (revised)"
- In reply to: William M. Klein: "Linugistics & COBOL design (was: Cobol AS/400 BNF Help Please"
- Next in thread: docdwarf_at_panix.com: "Re: Cobol AS/400 BNF Help Please"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
