Re: Languages: The Bigger the Uglier (was: Re: Aliasing in ISO C)

Arch Robison <robison@kai.com> wrote:


> Here's a solution:
>
> 1. Every year, put N language judges in a separate room. The
> judges would be good programmers, but not language lawyers. I
> leave this distinction to the reader.
>
> 2. Give each judge T hours to write down their description of the
> language.
>
> 3. Remove any feature from the language that K or more judges
> forgot to describe.
>
> If K=1, this is the extreme of making the language the intersection of
> what people remember.


I _like_ this idea!


#1, above, is particularly crucial. I've begun to notice that
particular personality types gravitate towards programming language
standards committees. The problem isn't that these people aren't
competent; indeed, the problem is the very opposite -- they're
extraordinarily competent. They can simultaneously hold the whole of
a very complex language in their heads, and can reel off obscure
sections of the manual which allow them to get around restrictions in
other parts of the language. They seem to _enjoy_ and _revel in_
complexity. They also tend to be extraordinarily talented _verbally_,
as well; after all, they are writing a specification in 'English'
(insert your favorite human language here). In short, they would tend
to go off-scale on the LSAT's (American law school aptitude tests).


I would add rule #0 to your list, above:


0. In advance, serve every judge a healthy helping of Alice B. Toklas
brownies.


This should reduce their short-term memories to more nearly that of
the practising programmer, so that #2 becomes a reasonable
approximation to a stressed-out programmer who has to ship product the
next day.


--
www/ftp directory:
ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/hb/hbaker/home.html
--

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