Anzû - 𒀭𒉎𒂂𒄷

Stochastic Hacker - Careless Aleatory Specialist - Professional Nonsense Counselor

  • 0 Posts
  • 12 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: December 20th, 2024

help-circle
  • Salve a tutta la banda.
    Insomma volete fare un repo f-droid per combattere la chiusura di Android? Sinceramente non so bene cosa abbia intenzione di fare google, ma se si arriverà a pretendere che gli sviluppatori Android siano schedati in un registro autorizzato la vedo dura qualunque alternativa. Per sviluppare ci vogliono gli sdk e questi sono sotto controllo google, basterà che siano messi sotto controllo e permettere di scaricarli solo agli schedati. Fine della festa. Questo sarà l’andazzo se google vorrà davvero chiudere il sistema e creare un ambiente chiuso alla Apple.
    Piuttosto che chiedere di poter installare le app android da dove ci pare, che per me sticazzi android, sarebbe opportuno chiedere la liberazione dei device mobili, ovvero niente più bootloader bloccati o addirittura assenti. Un device mobile è una macchina di calcolo da tasta e dovrei poterci mettere icché voglio, anche perché avendolo comprato e pagato lo possiedo. La solita storia dei pc che sta lentamente migliorando (pare). Sul repo f-droid, ok. Poi che si fa? Litighiamo perché io ci voglio mettere l’applicazione A, qualcuno la B e altri la C? Poi ad Oronzo che vuole la D versione 2.5? Gli diciamo di no? A Susanna Tuttapanna che è gnocca e vuole la D 2.5.2 invece gli diciamo di si? Chi se la prende la bega? Ve lo dico subito, io ho il vaffa facile; questo senza dire che ho voglia zero e tempo meno. Ci sarebbe pure da valutare la questione dello sviluppatore, se non fosse d’accordo ad avere la sua applicazione compilata e disponibile sul repo di lavalledeglignomi.it? Gli chiediamo il permesso prima, durante o dopo? Facciamo gli gnorri e chi vivrà vedrà?

    Non è per smontarvi, in fondo invece si, davvero vi volete prendere questa briga?

    Comunque, ringrazio Giacomo per la fiducia riposta e se proprio ci volete provare, come ha detto lui, una mano ve la posso anche dare ma sia chiaro senza impegno che oggi ci sono ma domani magari no.

    Servo vostro m. :D

    CC: @giacomo@snac.tesio.it @informapirata@mastodon.uno @lcruggeri@mastodon.uno @informatica@feddit.it


  • As I often say, industrial languages must be distinguished from academic or research languages. Industrial languages are born out of industrial needs, they are pragmatic and often dirty. Probably the ones you have to deal with in your work. Fortunately I don’t have to answer to anyone in my choices and I can use what I want for the most part. There are many languages suitable for teaching without lapsing into toy language. There is no politics in a programming language but rather in its use and software that is produced with it. Do we want to fall into defining right-wing for imperative programming and left-wing for logic? OOP? Functional? :D
    Oberon, Oberon. How many lines of code did you write in Oberon or ComponentPascal? Come on, let’s be serious. I probably wrote more in Oberon/ComponentPascal than you.
    Interesting Oberon? Yes it was twenty years ago but because the OberonSystem was interesting. Is it still? Fads come and go and sooner or later it’ll be back too, you just have to wait for.
    You want to teach Oberon? Do it, do less wanking and do it. You will gain time from the search for the perfect programming language. Perfection is in the language of god alone, I’m basking very well in the imperfection of language of the devil. :D

    CC: @informatica@feddit.it @programmazione@feddit.it @technology@lemmy.world @programming_languages@programming.dev


  • Programming languages are formal languages and must adhere to a higher level of rigour than natural languages, they cannot be ambiguous.
    They are not strange, they just have to be able to describe a very often complex reality. Beyond the simple hello world there are a myriad of problems to solve. Designing a language with three or four simple constructs is not difficult, but how to use it to describe complex problems? Simplicity of language but complexity of code? To achieve simple code in the sense of easily readable code, we often use not so simple languages, languages with hidden traps that only experts are able to master.
    What is needed, possibly, are languages with a low entry level and an expert teacher.
    In any case, programming is not easy, it requires organisational skills, abstraction and generalisation, analysis and so on. Probably a mindset that not everyone has and that must be accompanied, if not prone to such practice, by years of study and practice.
    We have talked several times about teaching programming to kids. Each time you try to bring up the subject by not addressing the real issue: the kid cognitive path. It’s not the in language itself, but in the right time to teach. There are many suitable languages and some integrated environments to do this without having to reinvent the wheel, especially ignoring the kid’s cognitive capacity. If at a certain age they are incapable of abstracting, there is no teaching that matters.
    On the discourse that they can understand better than an adult, I disagree, maybe an old man but not an adult in his full mental faculties.
    What would explicit language mean? I assume you mean imperative? Not only imperative languages are explicit. What does explicit mean? Not contain syntactic sugar? For some languages some structures are syntactic sugar and for others the same structures are not. What does explicit mean then?
    The clarity you find in an Oberon code others may find in other code, even assembly. You are not able to affirm the clarity of a language you know (obviously readable for you) and negate it for one you don’t. Too much easy don’t think? I rewrote, for example, that code in OCaml and to me OCaml is clearer than Oberon code and I know both languages. Who is right?
    In your language, with not inconsistencies (maybe), you are at the dilemma of the simplistic and the useful. Inevitably you fall in 25 years as a programmer, problems are probably real and cannot be ignored. A programming language must be able to deal with these problems, trying to be readable, but above all effective.
    One sometimes errs on the side of presumption, thinking that the multitude of people who have tried their hand at language development are therefore demented. That only you can solve the problems of the development world.
    No one escapes their own experience, the only one who could do so would be god. Does this entity exist outside of experience? … but, let’s drop this.
    As I told you, the idea that programming for everyone is not only utopian but myopic. People should have a critical approach to software before they know how to program, the reverse leads to developers with an ethical sensibility equal to a tick.

    CC: @informatica@feddit.it @programmazione@feddit.it @technology@lemmy.world @programming_languages@programming.dev