Re: parsability

Path	csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!peer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED!nerds-end
From	news@iecc.com (News Subsystem)
Newsgroups	comp.compilers
Subject	Re: parsability
Date	Mon, 9 Feb 2015 14:37:46 +1100
Organization	Compilers Central
Lines	40
Approved	comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID	<15-02-021@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References	<10-11-017@comp.compilers> <15-02-009@comp.compilers> <15-02-011@comp.compilers> <15-02-017@comp.compilers> <15-02-019@comp.compilers>
NNTP-Posting-Host	news.iecc.com
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
X-Trace	miucha.iecc.com 1423550947 68744 2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970 (10 Feb 2015 06:49:07 GMT)
X-Complaints-To	abuse@iecc.com
NNTP-Posting-Date	Tue, 10 Feb 2015 06:49:07 +0000 (UTC)
Keywords	history, design
Posted-Date	10 Feb 2015 01:49:07 EST
X-submission-address	compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address	compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives	http://compilers.iecc.com
rFom	"Robin Vowels" <robin51@dodo.com.au>
X-Received-Bytes	2900
X-Received-Body-CRC	1653075787
Xref	csiph.com comp.compilers:1523

Show key headers only | View raw

From: "Hans-Peter Diettrich" <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net>
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 6:49 AM
> Robin Vowels schrieb:
>
>> A number of special characters have traditionally acquired multiple uses.
>> The asterisk, parentheses, apostrophe, colon, period, feature heavily
>> on account of the limited number of characters available in equipment
>> of the era (48-character set, 60 character set, etc.) and continue to do so
>> for historical reasons.
>
> IMO the real and persistent limit is the keyboard, with a limited number
> of keys.

Present keyboards for the PC have keys for 33 special characters
(in addition to upper and lower-case and digits).
That's twice as many in use in languages.

> Increasing the number of keys is not a solution, because then
> it may be more time consuming to find an special key, instead of reusing
> a character or typing more characters.

No need to increase the number of keys.  Recall old typewriters?
Some had provision for three shifts (lower-case, upper-case, and special characters).
The same could be done with computer keyboards (well, it's sort of done with the normal, caps, and
CTRL keys).
A proper third shift key with corresponding glyphs inscribed on the keys
could extend the range of special characters.  After all, there is provision for 256 characters
encoded in a byte, and we use only half of them.

>Why didn't APL succeed in the long run?

Because it was write once throw-away language.
Programs were largely unintelligible to all except the writer.

This email probably contains viruses and malware despite what avast! Antivirus protection says.
[It was perfectly possible to write readable APL programs, but almost
nobody did. -John]

Thread

Re: Choosing a parser for Mathematica input fateman@gmail.com - 2015-02-05 08:08 -0800
  parsability (was: Choosing a parser for Mathematica input) glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-02-06 00:05 +0000
    Re: parsability and human factors "Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk> - 2015-02-07 12:45 +0000
      Re: parsability and human factors glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-02-08 10:32 +0000
        Re: parsability and human factors "Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk> - 2015-02-10 12:44 +0000
    Re: parsability "Robin Vowels" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2015-02-09 00:48 +1100
      Re: parsability Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2015-02-08 20:49 +0100
        Re: parsability news@iecc.com (News Subsystem) - 2015-02-09 14:37 +1100
  Re: Choosing a parser for Mathematica input Robert Jacobson <rljacobson@gmail.com> - 2015-02-06 19:04 -0800

csiph-web