[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Low-level vs. High-level programming
- Subject: Re: Low-level vs. High-level programming
- From: email@luddite.ca (Simon Williams)
- Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 23:43:40 GMT
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm, comp.sys.apple2, rec.games.video.classic, comp.os.cpm
- Organization: Luddite Enterprises
- References: <bcja6o$nhs$4@hercules.btinternet.com> <jEJHa.25310$sm5.22937@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net> <bcplc6$b5e$4@titan.btinternet.com> <l%1Ia.120$RK2.11917426@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com> <%82Ia.34625$QS4.4604@fe05.atl2.webusenet.com> <pan.2003.06.18.19.07.35.727341@tjonk.now> <4j3Ia.220$nx5.98@fe05.atl2.webusenet.com> <pan.2003.06.18.20.55.45.187290@tjonk.now> <et4Ia.909$J52.372@fe02.atl2.webusenet.com> <pan.2003.06.18.21.25.13.96296@tjonk.now> <2N4Ia.587$_d3.499@fe03.atl2.webusenet.com> <pan.2003.06.19.05.50.00.352768@tjonk.no w> <rhcIa.7524$nY2.2383@fe07.atl2.webusenet.com> <Xns939FBF8A5AB4wildstar128hotmailco@216.168.3.44> <SheIa.10577$_d3.8142@fe03.atl2.webusenet.com> <Xns939F7FE077EC4wildstar128hotmailco@216.168.3.44> <efoIa.14961$Xj1.7084@fe04.atl2.webusenet.com> <Xns939FEA015DC0Ewildstar128hotmailco@216.168.3.44> <SP-cnet7T7ABNG-jXTWJiw@comcast.com> <1fwuzp2.1c0b051cw0qsiN%email@luddite.ca> <e3c5e0313b6ea71aea2087677389b282@TeraNews>
- User-agent: MacSOUP/2.4.6 (unregistered)
- Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.sys.cbm:59024 comp.sys.apple2:31680 rec.games.video.classic:59210 comp.os.cpm:13443
Really <barryem@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Simon Williams" <email@luddite.ca> wrote in message
> 1fwuzp2.1c0b051cw0qsiN%email@luddite.ca">news:1fwuzp2.1c0b051cw0qsiN%email@luddite.ca...
>
> > This whole thread is turning into an excersise in (pointless)
> semantics.
> > And unless I'm very much mistaken, has little relevance to any of
> groups
> > to which it is being cross-posted... though if there is an HTML
> > interpreter available for the Apple II I'd be very pleased to
> hear about
> > it :)
>
> I agree that it's largely semantics but I don't think it's by any
> means pointless. Semantics rarely are pointless even though the
> term "semantics" might be used to pull us away from the central
> point of a discussion. But I think the semantics of this
> discussion are the central point.
>
> Actually I think this is a fairly useful discussion. No, we won't
> settle it or come up with an answer we can agree on and we probably
> won't change many minds.
That's what I meant by pointless I suppose... but you're right, it has
been a fairly interesting thread, though I'd still say it's about 95%
OT.
> But I've seen some new (to me)
> perspectives on the nature of a programming language.
>
> Barry
--
=LUDDITE ENTERPRISES=
http://www.luddite.ca