(Maybe OT?) The future of Programming Languages

[pete dashwood]

I came across this article in the course of my day and was prepared to
dismiss it as ill-informed hype from some journalist.

Instead, it is well considered and well-written by someone who has
actual knowledge of what he is talking about.

https://readwrite.com/2021/11/22/what-the-future-of-programming-languages-looks-like/

Enjoy!

Pete.
--
I used to write *COBOL*; now I can do *anything*...

[docd...@panix.com]

In article <j07vid...@mid.individual.net>,

pete dashwood <dash...@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
>I came across this article in the course of my day and was prepared to
>dismiss it as ill-informed hype from some journalist.
>
>Instead, it is well considered and well-written by someone who has
>actual knowledge of what he is talking about.
>
>https://readwrite.com/2021/11/22/what-the-future-of-programming-languages-looks-like/

From the abovegiven URL:

--begin quoted text:

The Role of Low-Code and No-Code Programming

We should also talk about the future possibilities of low-code and no-code
programming. As the names suggest, these types of programming try to limit
or completely eliminate the need for personal programming input. Most
people are so devoid of technical knowledge they have trouble remembering
and securing a simple password, so these types of applications have
tremendous potential to become popular.

--end quoted text

... and this caused me to ponder. I've seen articles and advertisements
for Low-Code and No-Code solutions and the words of my first COBOL
instructor resounded across the decades:

'The most important part about learning computer programming is NOT
learning how to program computers, it is learning to approach a problem in
a logical fashion: what are we looking for? Is it here? If it isn't,
what should we do? If it is, how do we know if it's any good? ... and so
on.'

So... if 'most people... have trouble remembering and securing a simple
password' how can one reasonably conclude that 'most people should be
encouraged to treat the company's data as each one of them sees fit'?

(the discussion about how 'remembering' is a function of 'memory' and how
'logicking' is a function of 'something else' may be left for another
time)

DD

[Bill Gunshannon]

A very good point. Reminds me of the early days of HyperTalk
on Apple. The language that was going to eliminate the need
for programmers and let anyone write computer programs. How'd
that work out. :-)

There was another interesting concept he presented:

"Special purpose languages. To date, some of the most successful
programming languages have been ones that can be used for just
about anything. But as our needs become more focused and more
refined, it’s going to be more important for “special purpose”
languages to emerge – highly concentrated programming languages
that are exclusively good for one or two types of applications."

Sound familiar? Do things like COBOL and Fortran come to mind?
I have long argued that the days of domain specific languages
were a good thing. It is also why I still advocate for COBOL
for business applications. Once again we see the big circle.
what was old will be new again.


Oh yeah, I know it's an American Holiday but Happy Thanksgiving
everyone.

bill

[Vincent Coen]

Hello docdwarf!

Thursday November 25 2021 01:54, you wrote to All:

> In article <j07vid...@mid.individual.net>,
> pete dashwood <dash...@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
>> I came across this article in the course of my day and was prepared
>> to dismiss it as ill-informed hype from some journalist.
>>
>> Instead, it is well considered and well-written by someone who has
>> actual knowledge of what he is talking about.
>>
>> https://readwrite.com/2021/11/22/what-the-future-of-programming-langu
>> ages-looks-like/

> From the abovegiven URL:

> --begin quoted text:

> The Role of Low-Code and No-Code Programming

> We should also talk about the future possibilities of low-code and
> no-code programming. As the names suggest, these types of programming
> try to limit or completely eliminate the need for personal programming
> input. Most people are so devoid of technical knowledge they have
> trouble remembering and securing a simple password, so these types of
> applications have tremendous potential to become popular.

> --end quoted text

> .... and this caused me to ponder. I've seen articles and

> advertisements for Low-Code and No-Code solutions and the words of my
> first COBOL instructor resounded across the decades:

> 'The most important part about learning computer programming is NOT
> learning how to program computers, it is learning to approach a
> problem in a logical fashion: what are we looking for? Is it here?
> If it isn't, what should we do? If it is, how do we know if it's any
> good? ... and so on.'

> So... if 'most people... have trouble remembering and securing a
> simple password' how can one reasonably conclude that 'most people
> should be encouraged to treat the company's data as each one of them
> sees fit'?

> (the discussion about how 'remembering' is a function of 'memory' and
> how 'logicking' is a function of 'something else' may be left for
> another time)

True and that's the difference between programmers and coders.



Vincent