On May 14, 8:08 am, Dan Sommers <d...@tombstonezero.net> wrote: > On Tue, 14 May 2013 04:12:53 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: > > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 4:02 AM, Skip Montanaro <s...@pobox.com> wrote: > >>> 8. A programming language is low level when its programs require > >>> attention to the irrelevant. > >> I think "irrelevant" in this context means stuff like memory > >> management. > > Sure. That one's pretty clear (if you care about memory management, > > you want a low level language) ... > > http://www.memorymanagement.org/articles/lang.htmlsays: > > C programmers think memory management is too important to be > left to the computer. Lisp programmers think memory management > is too important to be left to the user. > > (from Ellis and Stroustrup's The Annotated C++ Reference Manual)
Notable physicist David Bohm wrote that the difficulty in understanding quantum physics is largely a result of the limitation of the subject-predicate format of Indo-European languages. He suggested some experiments in languaging called rheomode that makes English more process-oriented and less (abstract)noun oriented. One part of this project is to learn to use the word 'relevate' -- which is 'relevant' verbified with an element of 'elevate' as in 'lift into relief' I guess the Ellis and Stroupstrup quote above just shows that C++ programmers relevate in one direction whereas Lisp programmers relevate in another. More http://www.mindstructures.com/2010/04/meaning-and-context/ Twenty two years ago I wrote about this http://www.the-magus.in/Publications/chor.pdf Suddenly I am finding glowing references to this http://dieswaytoofast.blogspot.in/2013/01/why-i-grown-to-loathe-c.html And I am uneasy because these questions are far less rhetorical/ tautological than I imagines in 1990! So here's a (rather incomplete/preliminary) rebuttal to myself http://blog.languager.org/2013/02/c-in-education-and-software-engineering.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
