Re: Universal grammar

In article <8764dgwuzw.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
LEE Sau Dan <danlee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Hans" =3D=3D Hans Aberg <haberg@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

....................

Hans> But the idea here is to avoid programming, and learn how a
Hans> computer works on the very basic level! Then learning
Hans> machine code is the absolute best, but already assembler is
Hans> too cryptic to a novice.=20

Then, use C instead. It's the "architecture-independent assembly
language". :)

It very definitely does NOT meet those standards. It does
not have the instructions I want to use.

For people who speak a SOV language, Postscript and Forth may be more
reasonable choices.

No, for understandability, infix is best. The commutative law,
(x+y)=(y+x) becomes xy+yx+=, and the associative law,
(x+(y+z))=((x+y)+z) becomes xyz++xy+z+=.

Hans> The language BASIC retains this step-by-step approach used
Hans> on the low level which gives hints on how to produce more
Hans> human-like cardboard games.

And what makes C not step by step? BASIC has terribly irregular
syntax rules. Very hard to learn and master. Unlike Pascal,
C/C++/Java, or even LISP, which have much simpler syntax. I like
Pascal for teaching structured programming.

No computer operates by "structured programming". They
all operate by the liberal use of "goto"s.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.