Top
Best
New

Posted by xiaoyu2006 8 hours ago

The foolishness of "natural language programming" (1978)(www.cs.utexas.edu)
148 points | 89 commentspage 3
anonymous908213 7 hours ago|
> (You have only to look at the indeed alarming amount of on close reading meaningless verbiage in scientific articles, technical reports, government publications etc.)

It is perhaps for the best that Djikstra did not live long enough to witness this problem become orders of magnitude worse.

Brian_K_White 6 hours ago||
Natural language as code has existed for thousands of years. Today we call it legalese.

It's excruciating to write, excruciating to read, and even legit geniuses with decades of hard won experience still leave room for essentially infinite interpretation. laws and contracts are all still swiss cheese and can be made to demand or prohibit whatever the party with the most money or other influence wants.

AgentMatt 2 hours ago|
If law was code, there would be no need for judges to make decisions. Instead, a "judge" would be someone making a mechanical derivation of the judgement given the situation and the law.

The law is rather a complex set of guidelines which need to leave some space for interpretation, so that additional relevant information for the situation at hand can affect the decision.

xiaoyu2006 8 hours ago||
A really interesting read in the current era.
mjb 7 hours ago||
And yet, the specification of almost every program in existence was communicated in natural language. At least between the customer and developer.

This argument makes the implicit assumption that humans are uniquely able to convert between this "customer wants a program that solves their problem" level and compileable code. That was a reasonable thing to believe in 1978, but is not a reasonable thing to believe in 2026.

likoya 4 hours ago|
Once an employer asked me to automatize his work, so the task that he did in weeks was done in seconds. I made a gui that showed every step he did manually, so he could check and understand every step. And yet he became confused and lost track of what the program was doing. He frequently asked me the very concepts he taught me so I could do the program. I just implemented exactly his specification. I didn't created any new concept, but as soon as the task became automatized, he stopped understanding.
anthk 6 hours ago||
Inform7 disagrees; altough you can use Inform6 which is like a really simple OOP language to create text adventures.
beej71 6 hours ago|
I appreciate inform7 is quite human-readable, but it's not free form.
veqq 4 hours ago||
Another article on this topic https://alexalejandre.com/programming/no-end-of-programming-...
nitbard 6 hours ago|
[dead]