Poll: Readable languages

[Attila Horvath]

Ingo

Though I subscribe to PYTHON and am new to the language, I've programmed
for 25+ years and know various languages to varying degrees. At the risk
of stirring up everyone's ire [although not my intention], I notice
'assembler' [of any kind] is not on your list of languages. Let me 
explain...

While it sounds ludicrous to include assembler, and I'll not defend
assembler as being inherently 'readable', I want to point out that 
MANY attempts have been made in the past to specify and design
'natural-readable' computer languages - COBOL being among early ones.

Since you're polling for opinions I suggest that there is no truth that 
ANY language has succeeded in being 'readable'. My absurd suggestion that 
'assembler' is missing from your list is my attempt at offering an opinion 
that the 'best' of languages can be made horrifically unreadable while the 
'worst' of languages can be made reasonably readable. For proof, see:

	http://www.ioccc.org/

In my years of experience I have come across VERY readable assembler and
very unreadable COBOL, PASCAL, FORTRAN, ADA, C/C++, JAVA, etc. So I
suggest that a langauge does not inherently make resultant code readable.
Rather the discipline applied by the programmer/author to the work is what
inherently makes any piece of work easily understood. I'm sure that even
with PYTHON's strict indentation rules, obfuscated contests can easily be
held with very clever winning entries!

So why 'assembler'? Because, [1]with the plethera of high level languages
in existance today none can teach programmers more about the inner
workings of both the language and the machine on which it's executed -
inner workings like memory usage, CPU cycles, efficiencies, performances,
etc.; and [2]ultimately ALL languages executed on ALL machines have to be
translated (converted) minimally down to one comman denominator, assembler
[even if it's simply for debugging purposes].

Before I'm accused of missing the point, I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT PEOPLE 
MUST PROGRAM IN ASSEMBLER. "THAT" would be ludicrous! I am suggesting 
however that assembler also qualifies for the specific questions you 
asked!

only my opinion, attila

PS: My reference to http://www.ioccc.org/ does not imply that "C" is a 
    readable language.

On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Ingo Linkweiler wrote:

> Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 13:24:59 +0200
> From: Ingo Linkweiler <i.linkweiler at gmx.de>
> Reply-To: i.linkweiler at gmx.net
> To: python-list at python.org
> Subject: Re: Poll: Readable languages
> 
> Poll:
> How readable is the code of this languages?
> 
> I do not want to give an exact definition of "readable", but it should 
> include each of this questions with ~25%:
> 
> - Can someone who has never seen the language before understand what the 
> program is doing without reference material?
> - Can a developer write code that they can return to after six months 
> and still understand it?
> - Can you use this language for teaching basics of programming and for 
> showing, how an easy algorithm works?
> - What is your general optionion about his language?
> 
> 1.)
> -----
> ABC:
> ADA:
> APL:
> BETA:
> C++:
> COBOL:
> DELPHI:
> EIFFEL:
> FORTH:
> FORTRAN:
> JAVA:
> LISP:
> MODULA:
> PASCAL:
> PERL:
> PROLOG:
> PYTHON:
> SML:
> SCHEME:
> SMALLTALK:
> TCL:
> VISUAL BASIC:
> other  (  *name of language * ):
> -----
> 2.)
> My most used language is:
> -----
> 
> Please vote....
> 1 = Easy to read, like pseudocode :-)
> 2 = Good
> 3 = Average
> 4 = difficult
> 5 = nearly impossible, when not knowing the language :-(
> blank = I do not know this language or have no opinion.
> 
> Please only vote, if you know at lease 2 languages.
> Please reply to : i.linkweiler at gmx.net
> 
> This poll is done for my diploma paper at university of dortmund, germany.
> I will not use your e-mail for any purpose.
> 
> Thanks for your help.
> Ingo Linkweiler
> 
> PS: I know, that a NG is not the best place for a poll, and some people 
> do not like questions like this in a NG.
> But as I want to get opinions of many programmers, including users of 
> NGs, I hope you can accept it.
> 
> 

                                    _          
Mutsuura Associates, Inc.         /\ \         
P.O. Box 1238                    /  \ \        
Vienna, VA 22183                / /\ \ \       
                               / / /\ \ \      
E-MAIL: contact at mutsuura.com  / /_/  \ \ \     
WEB: http://www.mutsuura.com /  \ \  /  \ \    
                            / /\ \ \/ /\ \ \   
MAIN:(703)281-9722         / / /\ \/ / /\ \ \  
CELL:(703)863-1933        / / /  \  / /  \ \ \ 
FAX :(703)281-9744       / / /    \/_/    \ \_\
SBA/SDB CERTIFIED        \/_/              \/_/