Re: Is there a programming language that is combination of Python andBasic?
Steven D'Aprano steveource.com.au wrote: COMEFROM on the other hand is just the purest evil imaginable. *grin* - I expect you say this because it is a bit like COBOL's alter - you cannot *see* it in place when you read the code, and the effect is only apparent at run time after the distant statement has been executed. Kind of fun... - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is there a programming language that is combination of Python andBasic?
Aaron Brady casti.@gmail.com wrote: On Apr 18, 4:44 am, Hendrik van Rooyen m...@microcorp.co.za wrote: to untangle some spaghetti code. He did not mention if the spaghetti was actually doing it's job, bug free, which IMO is the only rational test for the quality of a piece I don't use 'rational' in the same way. Do you mean objective? Do readability, brevity, simplicity, purity, etc. contribute to quality? Is program quality equivalent (or identical) to code quality? This paragraph illustrates the problem, I think: Is there a significant difference between rational and objective? Define readability, brevity, simplicity, purity, etc as applied to the quality of a programme - it leads, inevitably, to a floundering around in a wash of words. However, to stop playing Devil's Advocate, there is such a thing as code quality, but it cannot be defined, just like quality in general terms cannot be defined - as soon as you try, it turns to dross in your hands. Read Robert Pfirsig's Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance for a full explanation of this effect. I do not agree with the reasoning that effectively says: If it is difficult to comprehend, it must be wrong Wrong no, but impractical, possibly or probably or almost certainly, notwithstanding the subject-dependence of ease of comprehension. Simple code is more future-resilient than that which is difficult to comprehend, even holding the language (version) constant. It is a I think that the emphasis on future proofing code is actually overrated. We try to code as if we are building pyramids, for all time, but the sad experience is that only a tiny percentage of application code written has a life of longer than about eight years. 8-- that of exploration, pioneering, research, and development. However, even in simplest terms, some structures e.g. recursion, may be difficult to comprehend, but that doesn't mean they would be better more complicated. This is true - the one does not imply the other, but the subtlety is that it cuts either way - not more complicated, and not more simple. One has to strike a balance, and this is closer to an art than a science. That said, however, throwing out the goto ( or even the more intriguing comefrom ) is forcing the artist to paint while removing an element from his palette - he has to work around the lack. - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is there a programming language that is combination of Python andBasic?
BJörn Lindqvist b...@gmail.com wrote: I can somewhat sympathise with the op, neither python nor any other mainstream language can still do this: SCREEN 13 PSET 160,100,255 Oh come on! Don't be like that! Tell us what it does, please. - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is there a programming language that is combination of Python andBasic?
Mensanator mens...@aol.com wrote: 8 -- description of bugs in spaghetti --- Looks like that design really needed sorting out! A programmer once said to me Why should I run it, I know how it works, I wrote it. Are you serious? In my opinion, anybody who says this is not a programmer, but merely an arrogant idiot with a lot of misplaced self- confidence - somewhat like a permanent force corporal. My reply: You only THINK you know how it works. _I_, on the other hand, ACTUALLY know how it works because I've run it. How did you manage to keep your reply so meek? You must be a really well brought up person. :-) - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is there a programming language that is combination of Python andBasic?
On Apr 19, 3:05 am, Hendrik van Rooyen m...@microcorp.co.za wrote: Aaron Brady casti.@gmail.com wrote: On Apr 18, 4:44 am, Hendrik van Rooyen m...@microcorp.co.za wrote: to untangle some spaghetti code. He did not mention if the spaghetti was actually doing it's job, bug free, which IMO is the only rational test for the quality of a piece I don't use 'rational' in the same way. Do you mean objective? Do readability, brevity, simplicity, purity, etc. contribute to quality? Is program quality equivalent (or identical) to code quality? This paragraph illustrates the problem, I think: Is there a significant difference between rational and objective? Define readability, brevity, simplicity, purity, etc as applied to the quality of a programme - it leads, inevitably, to a floundering around in a wash of words. It is an old philosopher's problem, that is, a problem of old philosophers: do all rational wo/men behave the same given the same situations, or more specifically, analogously given related situations? Rational and objective are related, I think. An objective test of code would be a process anyone can follow and derive the same result, such as how many identifiers it contains. A rational test involves some sort of abstraction of humans, such as what the ultimately rational human likes most, etc. Objective partial credit on an exam, for example, must come from a black-and-white rubric with exactly no room for interpretation. Rational partial credit could involve inferences, guesses, and context, esp. acquaintance with the taker. I agree that many of those traits are matters of degree and multi- dimensional. I am looking for an objective metric of code: code X has traits P, Q, and R. Period. It would probably be simpler to start describing code objectively, rather than trying to square-peg-round- hole existing words. However, there may be no objective test of especially large sizes of code, and may fall to some sort of interpretation or assessment of the most rational wo/man. If I disagree with your measuring of a code with objective criteria, we merely walk through the measurement, and resolve our disagreement from the criteria upon discovering it. If I disagree with your measuring of it with rational criteria, we have to take into account all sorts of trade-offs, such as long-short term, one-many readers, different consequences, etc. I'm speculating a little bit in defining those words. I advance that two equifunctional programs (same input- same output) can be compared w.r.t. brevity, to take an example, up to isomorphism of identifier names, control structures, and statement order. That is, we can determine how brief code X is, disregarding identifier names, and statement order where irrelevant. Control structure brevity might be something we're trying to measure: while 1: if cond(): break while not cond(): ... Are these equally brief, assuming they accomplish the same thing? If we don't have unanimous agreement on the answer to that question, we must conclude that even brevity is a composite trait and we'll have to start simpler. A theory of traits would have to make concrete predictions about *something*. If some code has trait P, it will Q. However, to stop playing Devil's Advocate, there is such a thing as code quality, but it cannot be defined, just like quality in general terms cannot be defined - as soon as you try, it turns to dross in your hands. Read Robert Pfirsig's Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance for a full explanation of this effect. Are you saying that quality reduces to how pleasant a particular reader, or composite of multiple readers, finds the code? In the 1960s, programmers gave goto statements an average rating of 6 out of 10, 10 being most pleasing. In the 70s, that rating dropped to 5 out of 10. Subroutines were initially disliked, but came to be favored, advancing from 4/10 in the 60s to 7/10 in the 80s and on. Possible confounding variables include the increase in processor speed and thus the increased forgivingness of running time of gosubs; the prevalence of languages capable of generating subroutine calls; and the efficiency of the particular calls generated, surveys of which were not attempted. --Fabrication I do not agree with the reasoning that effectively says: If it is difficult to comprehend, it must be wrong Wrong no, but impractical, possibly or probably or almost certainly, notwithstanding the subject-dependence of ease of comprehension. Simple code is more future-resilient than that which is difficult to comprehend, even holding the language (version) constant. It is a I think that the emphasis on future proofing code is actually overrated. We try to code as if we are building pyramids, for all time, but the sad experience is that only a tiny percentage of application code written has a life of longer than about eight years. Project managers should, I judge, be versed in
Re: Is there a programming language that is combination of Python andBasic?
Hendrik van Rooyen wrote: Mensanator mens...@aol.com wrote: 8 -- description of bugs in spaghetti --- Looks like that design really needed sorting out! A programmer once said to me Why should I run it, I know how it works, I wrote it. Are you serious? In my opinion, anybody who says this is not a programmer, but merely an arrogant idiot with a lot of misplaced self- confidence - somewhat like a permanent force corporal. My reply: You only THINK you know how it works. _I_, on the other hand, ACTUALLY know how it works because I've run it. How did you manage to keep your reply so meek? You must be a really well brought up person. :-) Possibly because the proper reply was probably, You only THINK you know how it works. _I_, on the other hand, know how it behaves, even if I don't know how it was supposed to work. --Scott David Daniels scott.dani...@acm.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is there a programming language that is combination of Python andBasic?
On Apr 19, 3:51�am, Hendrik van Rooyen m...@microcorp.co.za wrote: Mensanator mens...@aol.com wrote: 8 -- description of bugs in spaghetti --- Looks like that design really needed sorting out! Since I was translating to Pascal, I couldn't emulate that code if I wanted to. A programmer once said to me Why should I run it, I know how it works, I wrote it. Are you serious? Absolutely. In my opinion, anybody who says this is not a programmer, but merely an arrogant idiot with a lot of misplaced self- confidence - somewhat like a permanent force corporal. That might have contributed to the reason why we din't sell too many systems. The last product developed ran on an IBM RISC PC using the PICK operating system. We sold nearly one. My reply: You only THINK you know how it works. _I_, on the other hand, ACTUALLY know how it works because I've run it. How did you manage to keep your reply so meek? He got paid more than I did. You must be a really well brought up person. :-) But not behind their backs. A program I created that tested anuther programmer's attempt at making a hash table was labeled HASHIT. Said programmer was long gone when the customer called and wanted to know why his 1 record database was saying it was full when only 3000 employees had been entered. Turned out that the hashing algorithm could not access any more than 3000 of the 1 available records. This isn't the kind of thing Field Service is supposed to have to deal with. - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is there a programming language that is combination of Python andBasic?
On Apr 19, 10:12�am, Scott David Daniels scott.dani...@acm.org wrote: Hendrik van Rooyen wrote: Mensanator mens...@aol.com wrote: 8 -- description of bugs in spaghetti --- Looks like that design really needed sorting out! A programmer once said to me Why should I run it, I know how it works, I wrote it. Are you serious? In my opinion, anybody who says this is not a programmer, but merely an arrogant idiot with a lot of misplaced self- confidence - somewhat like a permanent force corporal. My reply: You only THINK you know how it works. _I_, on the other hand, ACTUALLY know how it works because I've run it. How did you manage to keep your reply so meek? You must be a really well brought up person. :-) Possibly because the proper reply was probably, You only THINK you know how it works. _I_, on the other hand, know how it behaves, even if I don't know how it was supposed to work. Probably more accurate as his .exe file crashed immediately when executed. That's what lead me to supect he never ran it. --Scott David Daniels scott.dani...@acm.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is there a programming language that is combination of Python andBasic?
baykus b..@gmail.com wrote: I guess I did not articulate myself well enough. I was just looking for a toy to play around. I never suggested that Python+Basic would be better than Python and everyone should use it. Python is Python and Basic is Basic. I am not comparing them at all. I understand the merits of Python but that does not mean I can play with ideas? Apparently this is not allowed by the CS thought police. The reasoning is based on an Argument from Authority, namely the Dijkstra link. Now it looks to me when I read that article, that the jump is deprecated because it leads to code that is difficult to understand, which was based on the difficulty that Dijkstra had to construct a co-ordinate system for storing the state of a program at any given line of code. This was done without giving any reason as to why this should be important, or even desirable, except towards the end where he wanted to define instances in time when a count could conceivably be off by one, and he asserted without proof that having jumps in the code makes this more difficult. Even if this assertion were to be provably true, it does not really follow that jumps should be banned, but merely that one runs such a risk if one were to use them. Now to some minds, this difficulty may not be a difficulty at all: Processors and interrupt service routines are storing the state of multiple programmes at arbitrary points in the code, even as I type - and every one of those programmes include jumps. It is a non - issue. Mensanator had the same complaint based on difficulty earlier in this thread, when he described how he struggled to untangle some spaghetti code. He did not mention if the spaghetti was actually doing it's job, bug free, which IMO is the only rational test for the quality of a piece of code, because it is the reason for its existence. The aesthetics are, like all aesthetics, a matter of opinion. I do not agree with the reasoning that effectively says: If it is difficult to comprehend, it must be wrong If this were to be a tenet, then using the pickle module should be forbidden too, as it is a complex piece of code that (to me at least) is not easily understood on a first read-through. So does that mean I must stop using pickles? All Strength to Arnaud for his goto code! I am looking forward to the gosub and return. :-) - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is there a programming language that is combination of Python andBasic?
On Apr 18, 4:44 am, Hendrik van Rooyen m...@microcorp.co.za wrote: baykus b..@gmail.com wrote: I guess I did not articulate myself well enough. I was just looking for a toy to play around. I never suggested that Python+Basic would be better than Python and everyone should use it. Python is Python and Basic is Basic. I am not comparing them at all. I understand the merits of Python but that does not mean I can play with ideas? Apparently this is not allowed by the CS thought police. The reasoning is based on an Argument from Authority, namely the Dijkstra link. Boo, Appeal to Authority! snip to untangle some spaghetti code. He did not mention if the spaghetti was actually doing it's job, bug free, which IMO is the only rational test for the quality of a piece I don't use 'rational' in the same way. Do you mean objective? Do readability, brevity, simplicity, purity, etc. contribute to quality? Is program quality equivalent (or identical) to code quality? of code, because it is the reason for its existence. The aesthetics are, like all aesthetics, a matter of opinion. I do not agree with the reasoning that effectively says: If it is difficult to comprehend, it must be wrong Wrong no, but impractical, possibly or probably or almost certainly, notwithstanding the subject-dependence of ease of comprehension. Simple code is more future-resilient than that which is difficult to comprehend, even holding the language (version) constant. It is a matter of priorities, which have no objective right. The amount of people that can comprehend a code structure is a competing value to that of exploration, pioneering, research, and development. However, even in simplest terms, some structures e.g. recursion, may be difficult to comprehend, but that doesn't mean they would be better more complicated. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is there a programming language that is combination of Python andBasic?
On Apr 18, 2009, at 5:44 , Hendrik van Rooyen wrote: baykus b..@gmail.com wrote: I guess I did not articulate myself well enough. I was just looking for a toy to play around. I never suggested that Python+Basic would be better than Python and everyone should use it. Python is Python and Basic is Basic. I am not comparing them at all. I understand the merits of Python but that does not mean I can play with ideas? Apparently this is not allowed by the CS thought police. to untangle some spaghetti code. He did not mention if the spaghetti was actually doing it's job, bug free, which IMO is the only rational test for the quality of a piece of code, because it is the reason for its existence. The aesthetics are, like all aesthetics, a matter of opinion. Actually, I strongly disagree with this statement. In my experience, there has been very very few pieces of code that I've written that I hadn't wanted to *modify* at some point: extend it to a new set of circumstances, cover a different case, change the output, etc... The quality of a piece of code is not just if it works right now, but if you can reasonably extend it for the future. I toyed with Perl for a year or so, but couldn't give it my full attention. As a result, every few weeks when I wanted to modify what I wrote, I had to re- learn the code all over again because the syntax was so terse. The same is true for the typical use of a goto: you have to relearn the program, because the flow jumps around. It's not just about aesthetics, but about being able to work with a piece of code. bb -- Brian Blais bbl...@bryant.edu http://web.bryant.edu/~bblais -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is there a programming language that is combination of Python andBasic?
On Apr 18, 4:44 am, Hendrik van Rooyen m...@microcorp.co.za wrote: baykus b..@gmail.com wrote: I guess I did not articulate myself well enough. I was just looking for a toy to play around. I never suggested that Python+Basic would be better than Python and everyone should use it. Python is Python and Basic is Basic. I am not comparing them at all. I understand the merits of Python but that does not mean I can play with ideas? Apparently this is not allowed by the CS thought police. The reasoning is based on an Argument from Authority, namely the Dijkstra link. Now it looks to me when I read that article, that the jump is deprecated because it leads to code that is difficult to understand, which was based on the difficulty that Dijkstra had to construct a co-ordinate system for storing the state of a program at any given line of code. This was done without giving any reason as to why this should be important, or even desirable, except towards the end where he wanted to define instances in time when a count could conceivably be off by one, and he asserted without proof that having jumps in the code makes this more difficult. Even if this assertion were to be provably true, it does not really follow that jumps should be banned, but merely that one runs such a risk if one were to use them. Now to some minds, this difficulty may not be a difficulty at all: Processors and interrupt service routines are storing the state of multiple programmes at arbitrary points in the code, even as I type - and every one of those programmes include jumps. It is a non - issue. Mensanator had the same complaint based on difficulty earlier in this thread, when he described how he struggled to untangle some spaghetti code. He did not mention if the spaghetti was actually doing it's job, bug free, which IMO is the only rational test for the quality of a piece of code, because it is the reason for its existence. Oh, the bugs were there, alright. But they tended to be very subtle, so much so the original author must not have noticed them. For instance, a players AGILITY attribute affected the player's probability of hitting the monster he was attacking. This AGILITY attribute was altered by the quality of the player's armor, heavier plate armor being more adverse than light leather armor. In most situations, the adjustment is made once at the start of the game. Rarely is armor donned or removed during the course of the game. But it does happen in some games. I wrote one in which the player is captured and whatever armor he started the game with is taken away and part of his quest, in aggition to finding his way out of the dungeon, is to recover all the artifacts he entered the game with (which are hidden throughout to encourage wandering all over the layout). One of the symptoms of the spaghetti code's jumping around instead of doing subroutine returns was failure of the armor algorithm to properly adjust the AGILITY when armor is removed. The result was that AGILITY was only ever adjusted downwards, and never restored if it was taken off. If the player then subsequently donned it again, AGILITY would be further reduced. The same type of subtlty occured with monster COURAGE. Any monster (including the friendly ones who fought on your side) that didn't have a COURAGE rating of 100 was supposed to flee the room if a certain level of damage was taken. Again, because of goto screwups, such behaviour was rarely seen. Once corrected, it happened quite frequently, so much so that it affected the overall game itself. With the entire dynamic of the game beig very different, desingers estimates on how many monsters to place in a given scenario were all incorrect. The aesthetics are, like all aesthetics, a matter of opinion. Game design isn't just a matter of aesthetics. I do not agree with the reasoning that effectively says: If it is difficult to comprehend, it must be wrong A programmer once said to me Why should I run it, I know how it works, I wrote it. My reply: You only THINK you know how it works. _I_, on the other hand, ACTUALLY know how it works because I've run it. If this were to be a tenet, then using the pickle module should be forbidden too, as it is a complex piece of code that (to me at least) is not easily understood on a first read-through. So does that mean I must stop using pickles? All Strength to Arnaud for his goto code! I am looking forward to the gosub and return. :-) - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
