10 Sunday Nov 2019
Programmers, like carpenters, are builders — we make things. The work can be for pay, but carpenters, for example, can build their own bookshelves and doghouses. Programmers also make software for themselves, sometimes to amuse, sometimes to provide a useful function.
A few of the apps I created for myself over the years turned out to be major workhorses for me — tools I used frequently. One of the earliest was PF.EXE, my Process File utility.
25 Tuesday Jun 2019
Posted in Opinion
Tags
computer code, computer language, computer languages, computer programming, computer science, imperative programming language, language design, Object-Oriented Programming, OOP, programming language
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.
14 Friday Sep 2018
Posted in Opinion
Tags
computer code, computer programmer, computer programming, real programmers, software design, software development, software industry
There’s a general ethic these days — that anyone can code — and like a lot of things, there’s some truth to it, but also some silliness. As usual, it really depends on what we mean by “anyone can code.”
If we mean it in the same way we might say, “anyone can drive,” I think it’s silly. But if we mean in the same way we might say, “anyone can doctor (or lawyer),” well, then I still think it’s silly.
11 Saturday Aug 2018
Posted in Opinion
Tags
computer programming, computer science, program, software, software design, software development, software industry, xkcd
I cracked up when I saw this recent xkcd cartoon. Randall Munroe rarely fails to deliver, but this one especially caught my eye. It’s painfully on-point and quite dismaying on at least two points:
Firstly, that it should still be this bad given all the time, money, and attention, it has received is reason alone for dismay. Part of the problem here may be that we haven’t admitted how hard software is to get right.
But, secondly, software is central to our lives now — far more than airplanes, and even more likely than elevator rides. You might ride an elevator, at most, a dozen times a day, but software enters your life more times than that.
Especially if you use a mobile computing device!
02 Wednesday Aug 2017
Posted in Stories
Sometimes ya gotta laugh. I just spent nearly an hour chasing one of those bugs that “can’t be happening” because “the code looks absolutely correct (as far as I can tell).” Of course, the bug, once you find it, was always hiding in plain view.
This time the fix involved adding just two characters, incidentally improving the program semantics, and very much reminded me of the old joke about the huge cargo ship that breaks down at sea…
19 Monday Dec 2016
Posted in CS101
Tags
computer language, computer languages, computer programming, computer science, GOTO statement, iteration, language design, loop statements, programming language, recursion
When it comes to what makes a computer (or any other) language a programming language, there are three characteristics usually required:
This post is just a brief note (for a friend) about the third item and why it allows three distinct options.
06 Saturday Aug 2016
Posted in CS101
Tags
computer language, computer languages, computer programming, computer science, language design, programming language, Turing complete
Back in the post HTML is not a programming language! I brought up the three properties required by a programming language. A discussion recently got me thinking about it again. This post is just some notes on those thoughts…
25 Wednesday Nov 2015
Posted in CS101
Tags
computer, computer code, computer programming, computer science, Python code, state engine, state table
In the first two parts of this series I’ve introduced state engines and taken apart a specific instance of an engine. Now it’s time to tie together the design idea with approaches to building a variety of such engines.
Because the programming logic is in the state table, the engine can be fairly generic. That means it’s possible to create a state engine framework you can reuse for a variety of applications.
11 Wednesday Nov 2015
Posted in CS101
Tags
computer, computer code, computer programming, computer science, Python code, state engine, state table
Last time I introduced state engines and state tables. I showed parts of a simple implementation of one in Python. It parsed the language introduced in Little Programming Languages. This post continues that, so be sure you’ve read that first article.
I got as far as the state table implementing the process, and that’s where this post picks up. I’ll also get into the SourceReader class that does the heavy lifting.
08 Sunday Nov 2015
Posted in CS101
At one point in my career, the state engine (SE) was one of my favorite AWK hammers. At the time much of the work involved text processing or, in some cases, serial byte processing (which is not quite the same thing). That sort of thing is right in the wheelhouse for a state engine.
They are a very useful tool and an important part of any programmer’s toolkit.
