Skip to main content

in reply to Devine Lu Linvega

Are you suggesting the people at Sun who developed OpenBoot, which later became OpenFirmware, were idiots who didn't know computers?
in reply to Tor Lillqvist

@tml This is not my own writing, and I doubt this is what C. H. Ting is suggesting either(that was written prior to openfirmware), but keep pulling on that thread and it may lead to why this language was chosen as a front-end for users to interface with.
in reply to Devine Lu Linvega

hehe. yeah ok but the argument is likely that it's too high level, right?
in reply to LR

No, no, this book is like a .. early "Learning X for idiots", the author says you don't need to rely on a language's high priests to learn how to do any one thing, the language will enable the average cretin to get where they want to go.
This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Devine Lu Linvega

ok but that's just what i contest. the "cretins" that it might attract might still not be average enough.
in reply to LR

@lritter oh you meant great as in accessible? If so, yeah, I'm not sure, it's hard to say. I have .. toughts
@LR
in reply to Haelwenn /элвэн/

@lanodan @lritter yeah, there's a couple of these "simple" ideas which span an amount of irreducible complexity, which is not in itself simple at all.
in reply to Devine Lu Linvega

@lritter Relative to 1984 it might be accurate, however. Like BASIC is not really that easy. It's easy to learn but that's not the same as it being easy to do things in.
@LR
in reply to mcc

@mcc @lritter Have you ever come across this episode of Computer Chronicles? I think it still is true today X)
youtube.com/watch?v=-31sZfPMzw…
@mcc @LR
in reply to Devine Lu Linvega

@mcc @lritter Were you looking for the episode with Elizabeth Rather? I've got that filed away somewhere.
@mcc @LR
in reply to AlgoCompSynth by znmeb 🇺🇦

I have both, but I meant to share this segment when the guest says none of the standard programming languages are appropriate for the end user, not even BASIC.
This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Devine Lu Linvega

@mcc heh. evergreen quote. but i like to think i'm about to crack it. might still take 1-2 years.
@mcc
in reply to LR

I can't wait to see what you come up with! The best contender I've ever come across is still this(fractran): wiki.xxiivv.com/site/pocket_re…

I'm always on the lookout for even more distilled and approachable interfaces for computing.

This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Devine Lu Linvega

@mcc the key is datalog. i saw an inkscape in there, a game engine, a database system, the important bit is flattened composition, and a visualizable approach. hard to explain. i go entirely by intuition.
@mcc
in reply to LR

I think you're right, datalog/parlog is what lead me there too. Keep it up, I love following your experiments toward that.
This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Devine Lu Linvega

@lritter @mcc I'll be honest, my recent discovery of Inform 7 has made me re-evaluate the possibility of natural languages for programming.
@mcc @LR
in reply to Devine Lu Linvega

forth shares a weird attribute I also see in scheme: It allows for neat high level DSLs and very abstract code and it's clear that's the intention of the language, but the fundamentals are in some ways even lower level than C
in reply to lhp

it has "spatiality" which fires a part of my brain that only some 2D cellular automata do, which I find quite interesting from a UX perspective since it's usually not something that we content with in most programming languages.
This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Devine Lu Linvega

@lhp
I never thought of that but spatiality does indeed seem to be the thing that attracts me to it. Similar to Smalltalks.
@lhp
in reply to Kirtai

@kirtai I've been day dreaming about making a self implementation for uxn, something about that 8 opcodes VM feels like it would be fun play with..

Lo, thar be cookies on this site to keep track of your login. By clicking 'okay', you are CONSENTING to this.