Software epigrams

[rusi]

On May 14, 8:08 am, Dan Sommers <d... at tombstonezero.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 14 May 2013 04:12:53 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 4:02 AM, Skip Montanaro <s... at pobox.com> wrote:
> >>> 8. A programming language is low level when its programs require
> >>> attention to the irrelevant.
> >> I think "irrelevant" in this context means stuff like memory
> >> management.
> > Sure. That one's pretty clear (if you care about memory management,
> > you want a low level language) ...
>
> http://www.memorymanagement.org/articles/lang.htmlsays:
>
>     C programmers think memory management is too important to be
>     left to the computer. Lisp programmers think memory management
>     is too important to be left to the user.
>
>     (from Ellis and Stroustrup's The Annotated C++ Reference Manual)

Notable physicist David Bohm wrote that the difficulty in
understanding quantum physics is largely a result of the limitation of
the subject-predicate format of Indo-European languages.

He suggested some experiments in languaging called rheomode that makes
English more process-oriented and less (abstract)noun oriented.

One part of this project is to learn to use the word 'relevate' --
which is 'relevant' verbified with an element of 'elevate' as in 'lift
into relief'

I guess the Ellis and Stroupstrup quote above just shows that C++
programmers relevate in one direction whereas Lisp programmers
relevate in another.

More http://www.mindstructures.com/2010/04/meaning-and-context/

Twenty two years ago I wrote about this http://www.the-magus.in/Publications/chor.pdf

Suddenly I am finding glowing references to this
http://dieswaytoofast.blogspot.in/2013/01/why-i-grown-to-loathe-c.html

And I am uneasy because these questions are far less rhetorical/
tautological than I imagines in 1990!

So here's a (rather incomplete/preliminary) rebuttal to myself
http://blog.languager.org/2013/02/c-in-education-and-software-engineering.html