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

[mjmahon@aol.com (Michael J. Mahon)]

Randy McLaughlin wrote:

>I have quoted two definitions of programming from the dictionary (American
>Heritage) in previous posts:
>
> 6. A set of coded instructions that enables a machine, especially a
>computer, to perform a desired sequence of operations. 7. An instruction
>sequence in programmed instruction.
>
>You are obviously ignorant about what programming is.  Please read the above
>definitions.  HTML is a script, a script that is a sequence of commands that
>instructs a browser to take actions.  In other words a HTML file is an
>instruction sequence in programmed instruction.
>
>You can bring out all of the 8080 assembler examples of programming you
>want, you can talk about what hardware is or is not controlled (the VGA
>adapter is controlled via the HTML instructions), it simply does not change
>the very simple fact that HTML is a very limited computer programming
>language.
>
>In hardware a RISC computer is not less of a computer simply because it has
>fewer instructions.  As long as it has enough instructions to do what the
>user desires it is a computer.  A computer programming language is not
>defined by how elegant it is, nor how powerful it is.  A computer
>programming language is defined by whether it meets the criteria of writing
>a sequence of instructions for the computer, whether the are compiled or
>interpreted does not mater.

Clearly, we need to make a distinction between "programming" as in
"programming a computer" and "programming" as in "programming
a VCR".  The non-technical English word "programming" is so general
as to ignore such distinctions, but I think we all agree that these two
things are _very_ different in their scope and capability.

Not to mention "deprogramming" cult members, etc.  ;-)

-michael

Check out amazing quality 8-bit Apple sound on my
Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/