Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #24613

Re: Downwardly Scalable Systems

Show all headers | View raw

Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> wrote or quoted:
>programming languages that "scale down".

  David forgot to tell use what it means for a programming language
  to "scale down".

>Tcl or Python are "simpler" than C, but this is a result of the

  And again, he uses those quotes! How to define or measure the
  "simplicity" of a programming language?

>difficult to do easy things. To even get started, you have to have
>some notions of object oriented programming, you have to split your
>code up into lots of little files that must be properly named, and

  This is a Java program. It usually should be in a file "Main.java".

public final class Main
{ public static void main( final java.lang.String[] args )
  { java.lang.System.out.println
    ( "Hello world!" ); }}

  . In my Basic course I tell the participants to ignore the first
  three lines: They are just boilerplate material that is copied to
  every program. Then we explore what can be done in the last line!

  As long as your programs are small (even with many more lines than
  just four), there is no need "to split your code up into lots of
  little files that must be properly named". And when you split up
  your Python code into modules, they must be properly named, too.

  But as the course develops, gradually, my participants learn the
  meaning and purpose of the first three lines.

  So, when you start out with vague terms like programming
  languages that "scale down" and have a certain "simplicity",
  you can then give vague recommendations!

Back to comp.misc | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

csiph-web