Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]
From: Laurent Bossavit (laurent_at_dontspambossavit.com)
Date: 03/05/04
- Next message: Vladimir Trushkin: "Re: Code Coverage and QC (Was Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?)"
- Previous message: Anthony Williams: "Code Coverage and QC (Was Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?)"
- In reply to: Edward G. Nilges: "Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]"
- Next in thread: CBFalconer: "Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]"
- Reply: CBFalconer: "Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]"
- Reply: Willem: "Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]"
- Reply: Edward G. Nilges: "Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 15:40:31 +0100
Edward:
> I would put into question the very idea that a formal language is
> "readable" in the sense we can get and trust the sense of a nonformal
> text and the free play of its language, into which we add meaning as
> well as get meaning
In part, that is where "design" is at. Any given program text can be
transformed into a vast number of alternate texts which behave in
exactly the same was as far as machine interpretation is concerned;
these decisions are indifferent to the machine but make a lot of
difference to human comprehension of the same texts.
A difference which makes a difference: that was Bateson's definition of
"information". From information to meaning is another step, but I don't
doubt we do take that step when we read programs.
For one take on this idea, see Brian Marick's essay on Emersonian
Optimism:
http://www.visibleworkings.com/papers/agile-methods-and-emerson.html
> Dijkstra held many demotic concepts because malgre lui, Dijkstra was a
> Foucauldian who saw instinctively how metaphorical thinking, albeit
> supposed a mark of bien pensance actually misleads when the metaphors
My Sokal meter just went through the roof... Possibly only because
French is in fact my first language, and borrowings from it don't have
on me the effect you're intending. "Bien pensant" is closer to
"politically correct" than to any other nuance of correctness.
Laurent
http://bossavit.com/thoughts/
- Next message: Vladimir Trushkin: "Re: Code Coverage and QC (Was Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?)"
- Previous message: Anthony Williams: "Code Coverage and QC (Was Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?)"
- In reply to: Edward G. Nilges: "Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]"
- Next in thread: CBFalconer: "Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]"
- Reply: CBFalconer: "Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]"
- Reply: Willem: "Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]"
- Reply: Edward G. Nilges: "Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
