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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #54512

Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?"

Show all headers | View raw

BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

> On 13/12/2014 20:52, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> writes:
>
>>> On the other hand, a lot of code puts
>>> up widgets, responds to text input and mouse clicks, and calls
>>> functions to create, retrieve, update or delete records. You can
>>> think of that as a mathematical operation on a program's internal
>>> state if you choose, but good luck in trying to develop a method
>>> the really can guarantee that the system will behave as wanted, as
>>> well as responding to ad hoc requests for new features.
>
>> I do take your point (thought not exatky as you put it) that there is
>> much tedious boiler-plate code that needs almost no thought at all.
>> However, that's not really the part of the task we call programming that
>> matters is it?
>
> It forms a big chunk of it though. Think about writing a word
> processor, where most of it is concerned with user interfaces,
> displays, file formats and implementing 1001 different commands.
>
> It's more about routine engineering rather than neat little
> mathematical functions.

I think you've fallen for Malcolm McLean's interpretation of what I
mean.  I am talking about applying mathematical thinking to almost every
function -- even the ones that don't do anything "mathematical".  I put
that in quotes because it is my contention that programming *is*
mathematical, even when it doesn't look like it.  A function that moves
the editor's internal position to the end of the current line is a piece
of mathematics that can (and should) be reasoned about -- even if only
for a few seconds.

I don't think my point hinges on the proportion of code that is genuine
boiler-plate.  Boiler pate is code that needs almost no thought at all,
and if you are fortunate enough that 99% of some program is like that,
all it means is that yo are writing, in effect, a small program.  What
matters is to reason about those parts that need it, and that is almost
all code that not entirely routine.

I suspect this is a less contentious idea than it first seems.  I bet
that even people who seem dead against the mathematisation of
programming do this sort of reasoning a lot of the time.

> I was involved in computer graphics applications, at a time also when
> it was necessary to program almost /everything/, as the OS did nothing
> except provide file services. In my case that included implementing
> languages too, and using a lot of ingenuity for making everything work
> within limited memory and on slow machines.
>
> Maybe this kind of thing can all be considered tedious, routine coding
> that no-one should be involved in now and that you don't think is
> really 'programming'. But I think there's a huge requirement for it
> still, perhaps in different areas (web programming for example, which
> /I/ think looks tedious and boring! And then there is apps development
> for tablets...). It could be however that this is where the skills
> shortage might be.

A lot of this is "mathematical" in the sense that I mean.  The large
number of broken web sites and buggy apps suggests to me that something
is wrong in that area too.

> I also think that dynamic languages (in the informal style of Python,
> Ruby, Lua or even Javascript) are going to be more accessible than
> ones like Haskell or Ocaml, even though I quite admire those. Anything
> however is preferable to Lisp (IMO), no matter how powerful it's
> supposed to be.

That's another argument.  I think I agree (about the accessibility) but
I am not sure that that's a good thing.  Dynamic typing (which seems to
be what you mean by dynamic) does not stop you having type errors -- too
often it just means that they happen when I'm running the code rather
than when the compiler is looking at it.  I find a strong type system to
be very helpful, but it does take more time to learn.

-- 
Ben.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

"Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Lynn McGuire <lmc@winsim.com> - 2014-12-10 18:17 -0600
  Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" G G <gdotone@gmail.com> - 2014-12-10 22:55 -0800
    Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2014-12-11 09:01 +0000
      Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-12-16 02:41 -0800
        Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2014-12-16 11:08 +0000
          Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-12-16 13:06 +0000
            Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2014-12-16 13:14 +0000
            Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-12-16 07:29 -0800
              Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-12-16 16:23 +0000
          Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-12-16 17:23 -0800
            Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-12-16 18:06 -0800
              Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-12-17 07:35 -0800
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2014-12-17 16:01 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-12-18 10:30 -0800
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2014-12-20 18:45 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-12-20 11:58 -0800
    Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Thomas Jahns <jahns@idontlikespam.dkrz.de> - 2014-12-12 11:15 +0100
  Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-11 04:11 -0800
    Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" "ocq (an evil corporate man)" <ocq@maili.ng> - 2014-12-11 17:36 +0100
      Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-11 08:44 -0800
        Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" "ocq (an evil corporate man)" <ocq@maili.ng> - 2014-12-11 17:53 +0100
          Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-11 09:57 -0800
      Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-12-11 15:21 -0800
        Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" "ocq (an evil corporate man)" <ocq@maili.ng> - 2014-12-12 11:14 +0100
  Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-12-11 05:06 -0800
    Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-11 05:48 -0800
      Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-11 06:17 -0800
    Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" JohnF <john@please.see.sig.for.email.com> - 2014-12-13 10:22 +0000
      Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-12-13 10:34 +0000
        Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-12-13 14:04 +0000
          Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-12-13 07:42 -0800
            Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-12-13 20:52 +0000
              Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-12-14 00:23 -0800
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-12-14 12:07 +0000
              Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-12-14 13:20 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-12-14 22:43 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-12-15 01:33 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-12-15 02:39 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-12-15 03:16 -0800
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-12-15 17:24 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2014-12-15 18:01 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-15 14:25 -0800
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2014-12-16 08:46 -0500
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-16 05:59 -0800
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2014-12-17 08:21 -0500
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-12-17 07:27 -0800
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2014-12-16 14:29 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2014-12-16 08:51 -0500
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2014-12-16 14:30 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-12-15 10:02 -0800
          Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2014-12-14 00:36 +0000
            Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-12-14 01:22 +0000
              Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2014-12-14 07:35 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2014-12-14 04:39 -0800
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2014-12-14 08:14 -0500
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-12-14 08:02 -0800
            Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-12-16 04:52 -0800
        Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com - 2014-12-13 06:39 -0800
        Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2014-12-13 15:57 -0600
          Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2014-12-15 09:51 -0600
            Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2014-12-15 20:30 +0000
              Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-12-15 21:29 +0000
              Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2014-12-15 21:23 -0600
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-12-16 04:14 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2014-12-16 09:11 -0600
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-16 13:13 -0600
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-12-16 19:27 +0000
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2014-12-16 16:11 -0600
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-12-16 14:39 -0800
                Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2014-12-16 18:25 -0600
      Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-12-16 05:13 -0800
  Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2014-12-11 07:28 -0800
  Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-11 17:29 +0100
  Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Jens Stuckelberger <Jens_Stuckelberger@nowhere.net> - 2014-12-11 17:59 +0000
    Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2014-12-11 19:05 +0100
  Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" Rosario193 <Rosario@invalid.invalid> - 2014-12-12 11:37 +0100
  Re: "Is C Still Relevant in the 21st Century?" John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2014-12-15 10:49 -0800

csiph-web