View Poll Results: Sound interesting, and if so, which method should I take to compile code?

Voters
35. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, directly compile code and use an embedded VM

    5 14.29%
  • Yes, convert to C++ and compile

    7 20.00%
  • Yes, convert to ASM and compile

    3 8.57%
  • Does not sound very useful

    20 57.14%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Human Readable programming language

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Beans
    284
    Distro
    Ubuntu 6.10 Edgy

    Re: Human Readable programming language

    Others here have already hinted at one of the big problems of a project like this. Re-writing existing code structures using verbose, English-like sentences will provide very little gain.

    The English language is a very flexible language, and full of opportunities for ambiguity. Even completely ignoring the problems of contextual ambiguity and learned implications, you'd still need to have a parser that can understand a variety of sentence structures for this to be possible.

    I can see a language like this actually frustrating a newbie more than helping him or her. It will present the illusion of a flexible human-language-based parser, but it's undoubtedly going to be constrained by the same rules that already constrain programming languages. The rigidity of programming language syntax is still a very important concept to become aware of, and comfortable with. A language like this detracts from that.

    I can see where this might have some direction as a purely pedagogical tool (or perhaps a technical writing trainer...teehee) but it wouldn't make a good starting point for a blossoming programmer, at least not in our current environment of languages and programming paradigms.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Beans
    284
    Distro
    Ubuntu 6.10 Edgy

    Re: Human Readable programming language

    By the way, in no way am I suggesting that you abandon this thread of thinking! I think you should continue to work on your project, but I think that questions like the one you present in the poll are somewhat misguided.

    Assuming you could make a natural language parser with enough flexibility to make it non-trivial (so that you're not just replicating the (strict) syntax of a programming language using different words and symbols), perhaps having the natural language translated into a pure language like Python (which is still fairly n00b-friendly) would be a good idea. This would help a beginner see the connections between natural language and programming language, and also learn how ambiguities in natural language must be resolved in programming languages.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Beans
    2,715

    Re: Human Readable programming language

    Yes, it would probably be more educational if it translated to a variety of languages.

    Python, C, C++, Assembly

    Perhaps they could learn from the parallel.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Manchester
    Beans
    2,086
    Distro
    Ubuntu Mate 15.10 Wily Werewolf

    Re: Human Readable programming language

    you might want to look at some apple script code. that is pretty close to english.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Seattle
    Beans
    2,893
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Human Readable programming language

    Looks like I missed something in the description - the code can be shorthanded, as far down to the level of Basic or Python. I am intending for it to be flexible, so once someone is able to code, they can gradually ease into more compact code.

    Essentially, the above code could be shortened to:
    Code:
    if counter > 5 then
      show message "It is greater than 5!"
    else
      end
    And I agree, this language will not have much usefulness in actual programming, but more simply as a way for newbie programmers to get started.

    Take a look at the software Game Maker (http://gamemaker.nl). It is windows and proprietary, but the code structure is very easy to use. Code can even be edited in a drag-and-drop style method. The target audience will be that same group of people.

    As for AppleScript, yes, it could look similar to that.

    This whole project is more of a personal thing for me to work on when bored, withering away my time. It's a personal goal to finish it and to release it, even if it won't be widely used. I have a lot more fun programming it than I will releasing/marketing it.
    Last edited by jpeddicord; February 1st, 2007 at 04:29 AM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Beans
    34

    Re: Human Readable programming language

    As slavik mentioned, they tried that with Cobol so managers could read it (code along the lines of "take 10 percent of earnings and give the manager a fat bonus" or something...)

    Programming requires thinking in a certain way - anyone who can think this way will probably prefer to express themselves concisely. Anyone who can't (yet) will probably end up telling the computer the wrong thing, even in English.

    For it to be computer readable you'd have to impose so many rules on what people can write. It's just easier to use more mathematical notation IMO. Or if you have to use a language, use lojban

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Western Australia
    Beans
    11,480
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: Human Readable programming language

    Sorry, you've been beaten to it by 20 years!

    Hypercard was the world's first multimedia authoring program, released by Apple in the late 80s. It uses point-and-click to create the actual visuals, like a painting program crossed with Glade or Visual Basic. The language is Hypertalk, which bears a lot of resemblence to your language. You can even use it non-verbosely. And it was VERY popular, partly because the language was easy to write in and understand.

    Macromedia had a very similar system with Director (the language was called Lingo), but now they encourage the use of the non-verbose version.

    You can download a trial version of Runtime Revolution for Linux, Mac or Windows, which will let you experience a slightly-modified version of Hypertalk.
    I try to treat the cause, not the symptom. I avoid the terminal in instructions, unless it's easier or necessary. My instructions will work within the Ubuntu system, instead of breaking or subverting it. Those are the three guarantees to the helpee.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Seattle
    Beans
    2,893
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Human Readable programming language

    Quote Originally Posted by 3rdalbum View Post
    Sorry, you've been beaten to it by 20 years!

    Hypercard was the world's first multimedia authoring program, released by Apple in the late 80s. It uses point-and-click to create the actual visuals, like a painting program crossed with Glade or Visual Basic. The language is Hypertalk, which bears a lot of resemblence to your language. You can even use it non-verbosely. And it was VERY popular, partly because the language was easy to write in and understand.

    Macromedia had a very similar system with Director (the language was called Lingo), but now they encourage the use of the non-verbose version.

    You can download a trial version of Runtime Revolution for Linux, Mac or Windows, which will let you experience a slightly-modified version of Hypertalk.
    Maybe I'll get the edge of having this as a GPL program.
    Oh yeah.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Beans
    121
    Distro
    Kubuntu Development Release

    Lightbulb Re: Human Readable programming language

    Although I recently came up with a similar idea, I would NEVER use English. First of all, I would use a Logical Constructed Langauge with EXPLICIT PHONOLOGY (meaning programmatical syntax is clearly verbalized), it performs as a dual conlang & multiparadigm programming language, with excellent support for logical and OOP paradigms, although functional and other paradigms are fully supported via a Mode Code in a Context Header (which has specialized syntax and is clearly detected with a small-memory-footprint combination speech-2-text + interpreter (which interprets the constructed language during (verbal) dictation (via a small-footprint voice activation engine than plugs-in as a runtime module into this interpreter to input script), interpreting into a non-executable object code (simplifying concise verbal logic constructs into standard syntactic shorthand), which would then JIT-compile to a selection of final languages, such as Python, Java, Delphi, C/C++, or Assembly.
    Registered Linux user : #470877
    Registered Ubuntu user: # 21928
    My Blog | MySpace Account | Google Group

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Ede, Netherlands
    Beans
    36
    Distro
    Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid Ibex

    Re: Human Readable programming language

    It doesn't seem to be very usefull to me, because with a language like smalltalk you can almost do the same:

    Code:
    x := 0.
    [ (x < 10) ] 
    whileTrue: [Transcript show: (x) printString.
                Transcript show: ' '.
                x := x + 1.].
    
    
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
    Yes there is some extra's that are not in the English language, and the gramatic is not always the same, but that is something you can hardly avoid...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •