Re: Low-level vs. High-level programming (was My First Computer)

["Randy McLaughlin" <randy@nospam.com>]

"Sam Gillett" <samgillett@msn.com> wrote in message
news:j%tIa.2423$vB.1697@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
>
> Randy McLaughlin wrote ...
>
<snip>
> If I use a pen to draw a flow chart for a program before writing any code,
> is that not part of the programming process?

Yes it is part of the programming process, but it is not part of the
program.

>
> >That is why I keep bringing up an early programming example:
> >looms.  The cards that program looms are sequenced and the cards do
contain
> >instructions.
>
> And these types of looms were in widespread use as recently as 25-30 years
> ago.  I agree that they are controlled by a program.  But if following a
> rigid sequence of instructions is a requirement for a set of instructions
to
> be a program... I am afraid most software does not qualify.  The _exact_
> sequence of instructions executed by softwqare will vary depending on user
> input.  Except, of course, in the case of a simple "Hello world!" program.

The looms are still in use today producing the finest machine made carpet
made today.  Many computer programs do execute the same code exactly the
same everytime without change.  While most process control systems do change
according to input there are still many that do not.  One example is in
trafic control, when a trafic light is installed it can be setup for a set
timing that does not vary according to traffic.  Not as efficient, but since
it uses fewer parts (sensors) it is cheaper.  Now days I know of no more
electromechanical traffic control systems still being built but simple
computerized systems have replaced them.  There are thousands of other
examples.

>
> >It amuses me that people insist on referring to HTML tags and
> >refuse to see that the tags are instructions.  People use the vernacular
> >term of programming to exclude everything but C and a few other
languages.
>
> If HTML can be considered programming, it is a very primitive form of
> programming.  Perhaps not as primitive as the wire jumpers used to program
> ENIAC, but still primitive.

Agreed 100%.  I never claimed that HTML is a sophisticated programming
language.

>
> >Someone said you can not have a true definition of programming just as
> >there is no definition of the sky being blue.  Not true the blue sky can
be
> >explained to a blind person using mathematical terms and dictionaries
have
> >the definition of programming.  The blind person may never be able to
enjoy
> >the beauty of the sky, but colors do have a definition.  They are given
in
> >angstroms.
>
>
> There is no black and white (or blue) definition of a blue sky.  The sky
is
> a different shade of blue at 20,000 feet than at sea level, and many
shades
> between.

True but all can be specified mathematically.  One of my early programming
jobs was in Herman Hospitals medical school in Houston, TX in a visual
science dept.  I had to convert a fortran program that ran on a Univac
system to the schools CDC system.  It calculated many of the properties of
light.  I am aware of the properties of light and the perception of light.

<snip>
> In my opinion, HTML can only be considered a programming language to the
> extent of its ability to call routines in other, higher level, languages.

Sounds a little like a cop out.  If you can agree that it follows a sequence
and that the tags are instructions it is a programming language.  Calling
functions written in other languages has never been a requirement for any
type of program.  HTML was extended via JAVA, CGI, CSS because it is too
weak, not because that is required to make it work.

>
> Best regards,
>
> Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
>      Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area.  Commodore lives!