Programming Linguistics

Discussions on everything related to the software, electronic, and mechanical components of information systems and instruments.

Programming Linguistics

Postby Terry on March 29th, 2013, 2:06 am 

I am wondering the process of translation from the physical presentation to the what level and how level programming.

Is the language getting more monotonous but tedious when comparing the high level language to the intermediate language down to the assembly and machine code? i.e. the language syntax content decreases down the way but the amount of instruction increases, less repeating units combine in more subtle ways and finally all in terms of 0s and 1s combinatorics.
It is about creating everything out of the bits flipping in the memory space, as complexity and diversity emerge from the underlying simiplicity. What is the potentiality laying out there?
Terry
Member
 
Posts: 449
Joined: 01 Sep 2008


Re: Programming Linguistics

Postby Obvious Leo on March 29th, 2013, 3:54 am 

Terry. I wish I knew what the hell you were talking about but unfortunately I know nothing whatsoever about computer programming and I'm probably too old and too thick to learn. However this phrase caught my eye "complexity and diversity emerge from the underlying simplicity". Would you be good enough to indulge a techno-moron and offer a brief overview in layman's language of what a geek means by this concept.

Regards Leo
Obvious Leo
 


Re: Programming Linguistics

Postby Terry on March 29th, 2013, 9:15 am 

This involves how everything in the programming world is built up from the high level repeating constructs (e.g. design patterns) which are in term compose of other lower level repeating constructs (e.g. class library, API) down the way to the final bits. It works like everything can be achieved by repeating the basic fundamental constructs to form more complex constructs upon constructs ever through a diversity cascade. Perhaps, the repeating unit principle works not just in programming but in every aspect of the universe.
Terry
Member
 
Posts: 449
Joined: 01 Sep 2008


Re: Programming Linguistics

Postby DragonFly on March 29th, 2013, 12:13 pm 

I use higher level functions, like, say, Binary_Search, which I created. Some may be recursive. The benefit is that these functions are known to work, so any problems would be at an obvious high level, such as one forgot to sort the file, which the Binary_Search would complain about, anyway. Presumably, the entire program is not much more than calls to functions. More errors come into play if one codes directly at a low level
User avatar
DragonFly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2386
Joined: 04 Aug 2012


Re: Programming Linguistics

Postby Obvious Leo on March 29th, 2013, 4:12 pm 

Terry wrote:This involves how everything in the programming world is built up from the high level repeating constructs (e.g. design patterns) which are in term compose of other lower level repeating constructs (e.g. class library, API) down the way to the final bits. It works like everything can be achieved by repeating the basic fundamental constructs to form more complex constructs upon constructs ever through a diversity cascade. Perhaps, the repeating unit principle works not just in programming but in every aspect of the universe.


Thank you Terry. I got that, believe it or not and the "every aspect of the universe" bit is the direction I was heading in, since I regard the universe itself as an information entity. One further question. Would I be right in conceptualising this notion in terms of embedded orders of complexity nested within each other like Russian dolls?

Regards Leo
Obvious Leo
 


Re: Programming Linguistics

Postby Terry on March 30th, 2013, 12:47 am 

Some scientists like to use the Russian dolls analogy to represent the layer upon layer structure. In programming, we called it level of abstraction. It seems that nature is repeating itself but each time in a slightly different way and slightly different units form more extended units in both space and time.

When working in a high level language, we only need to have an unique and consistent symbolic representation of what to do, so I called it the what level programming. To learn programming in general, try not to pay too much attention on the syntax as it is really arbitrary. In essence, the abstract flow of logic is independent of the symbols representing it. The logic seems more dependent on the applied programming paradigm and become nearly unavoidable sequence of steps. We only need to find the minimum representation to implement it. Until we have to actually carry out the instructions on the computer,then we have to translate whats in term of hows. Who have more to say about the how level programming?
Last edited by Terry on March 30th, 2013, 12:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
Terry
Member
 
Posts: 449
Joined: 01 Sep 2008


Re: Programming Linguistics

Postby Terry on March 30th, 2013, 12:52 am 

pls del
Terry
Member
 
Posts: 449
Joined: 01 Sep 2008


Re: Programming Linguistics

Postby Terry on April 18th, 2013, 1:21 pm 

I always want to understand in a generic way and to cope with all programming languages ever possible. So, what it really is? I can present the what instructions in whatever way I like (the code as a presentation layer or even in a more higher level of visual programming with the visual interface as pictorial presentation) and then have a compiler to convert to lower level code, possibly through some more intermediate conversion and ultimately the how instructions for the CPU in term of its finite instruction set. What we need is a consistent set of symbols working all the way down the various abstraction layers to the final bits. The scope of a consistent symbolic set constitutes a specific programming language. The syntax of a language does matter when you actually have to use it to write a program. However, in the higher programming linguistics perspective, the syntax is really an arbitrary creation which can be as diverse as the world's written languages.

What other insight do you really have?
Terry
Member
 
Posts: 449
Joined: 01 Sep 2008


Re: Programming Linguistics

Postby Terry on April 23rd, 2013, 1:01 pm 

When we formulate a solution for a problem domain, we begin with abstracting the essence from a physical scenario and representing it by certain form carriers most commonly as diagrams or symbols. Once the essence of abstraction is crystallized and the abstracta are physically represented for example as symbols, they are frozen in certain state and the subsequent symbolic manipulation is dependent on the methodology of representation. This kind of representation dependency is evident in the number system, coordinate system etc in which certain ways of representation result in simpler symbolic manipulation or calculation. The abstracta such as number, line, circle are independent of the representation which varies in different circumstance. They live forever in their purity and out of our reach in the abstract paradise. As such, a domain specific programming language works well in its specialized area as its symbolic set of representation is customized to that environment. Is there ever a way of finding the most effective and efficient way of representation??

All the way I am talking in a very broad and general sense. Sometimes, you know very specific about one language but still get a vague sense that you don't know what is programming language in general. It seems to be a great mathematical problem of the very way of representation. Perhaps a whole branch of representation theory is needed.
Terry
Member
 
Posts: 449
Joined: 01 Sep 2008



Return to Computers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests