Tag Archives: computer languages

OOP versus Imp

25 Tuesday Jun 2019

Posted by in Opinion

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

This is another note for a friend: a followup to a discussion about how some programmers really hate Object-Oriented Programming (OOP) languages.

Most of those who hate OOP hold up Imperative Programming (IP) as the One True Way to write code. The key difference is the IP is function (or verb) oriented whereas OOP is object (or noun) oriented.

I’ve never really understood that active dislike. It’s just another way to organize the same code you’d write anyway.

Continue reading →

Aside

Update July 2017

20 Thursday Jul 2017

Posted by in Blog

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

In the unlikely event anyone is reading this, and, more in the original spirit of “web logs“, as much a diary entry to record both the passing of time and the moment, after a long period of quiet, and in the long-winded run-on way that I sometimes have, a post.

Continue reading →

Iteration versus Recursion

19 Monday Dec 2016

Posted by in CS101

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

When it comes to what makes a computer (or any other) language a programming language, there are three characteristics usually required:

  1. Saving state (variables)
  2. Selecting a code path (if-then)
  3. Iteration or recursion (or equivalent)

This post is just a brief note (for a friend) about the third item and why it allows three distinct options.

Continue reading →

Rare Languages

26 Tuesday Jul 2016

Posted by in Fun

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Cleaning out some old boxes of papers, I came across one of those humor bits that circulate in any profession. Back in the day, it was usually by fax. Then it was email, and now Tweets and other social platforms. (The song remains the same.)

This one concerned “rare” (i.e. made up) languages loosely based on existing languages. The humor depends, mostly, on recognizing parodied languages and certain other topical references (like “Valley Girls”).

In other words, a lot of the funny has sailed, but I found parts of it cute enough to record here…

Continue reading →

HTML is not a programming language!

22 Monday Dec 2014

Posted by in CS101

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

A webpage is a text document written in HTML. This document may also contain CSS and/or JavaScript, but it’s basically an HTML text document. You could write one — including the CSS and JavaScript — using just a pencil and paper.

Despite not needing a computer to write, all three are computer languages — they are languages used by, understood by, computers (and trained humans). However only one of those (JavaScript) is a programming language.

This is a brief explanation of which is which and why.

Continue reading →

Data, Text and Strings (oh, my!)

15 Tuesday Apr 2014

Posted by in Opinion

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

The Strings and Text are not the same post on Musing Mortoray discusses the difference between “text” and “strings” and got me thinking. Rather than weigh down his (or her) comment section with a very long comment, I thought I’d go on a bit about it here.

I agree totally with the basic premise: that “text” and “strings” are different beasts. I also agree that text-handling depends on the text. There might be some difference in how we define text and string, and thinking about how I define them turned up a lot of thoughts on the matter. This isn’t intended as an opposition post (except on one point with regard to HTML). What follows is just one programmer’s opinion.

Continue reading →