Autocoding project proposal.

[Timothy Rue]

On 23-Jan-02 18:02:10 phil hunt <philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>On Wed, 23 Jan 2002 18:07:40 GMT, Timothy Rue <threeseas at earthlink.net>
>wrote:
>>On 21-Jan-02 07:59:29 phil hunt <philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

>>>When you say autocoding, what do you mean?
>>
>>Programming is the act of automating the use of complexity that is made up
>>of simpler things. Done so that such complexity is easier to use. As such
>>the complexity of programming itself can be automated.

>Isn't that what high(er) level languages do? For example assmebler is
>a higher level than machine code, C is higher level than assembler,
>C++ is higher level than C, and Python is higher level than C++.

>Are you proposing something that is higher level than Python?


No. you cannot solve a general language problem by creating another
language.

Even mathmatics has it's limitations on it's ability to express. Godels
Theorm and Turning halting problem.


Think of it this way: the programming language is like the song the radio
station plays. The tool I am talking about that will enable autocoding, is
like the broadcast carrier wave. The carrier wave doesn't care about what
song the DJ plays or if the news is being played, etc..


The DJ can read machine language, assembly language, BASIC, Fortran, C,
Python, Rebol, etc... But the carrier wave is still going to be the same
and it's going to carry whatever over it.

Nine commands and their options along with related files that help keep
track of things as they are being moved across a dynamic carrier wave.

Understand the difference and how the answer to your question is no?