This is bad. We need code editors/languages that will comment on likely gaps between what was *actually* specified and what was *meant*
-
Types are relevant to computers. Not to humans. Like most of CS. If users have to care about "types", we are doing programming wrong.
Current programming expects us to specify instructions, and then proceeds to execute them exactly. Instead, they should reason about intent
-
-
And when intent is unclear (most of the time), interactively ask the user for more information -- as a dialogue
-
Sorry that kind of design that leads to a next generation Stata or R.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Current programming != imperative languages. Declarative style & DSLs express intent with less boilerplate. Compilers can do more work.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.