Two sides - Revision history

JaroslavTulach at 11:50, 17 January 2013

JaroslavTulach — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:50:48 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:50, 17 January 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	[[wikipedia:Edsger_W._Dijkstra\|Edsger Dijkstra]] wrote an [http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD06xx/EWD611.html interesting essay] called ''On the fact that the Atlantic Ocean has two sides'', which, in some parts, nicely contributes to discussion about [[rationalism]], [[empiricism]] and [[cluelessness]]. Here are few quotes I found inspiring.	+	[[wikipedia:Edsger_W._Dijkstra\|Edsger Dijkstra]] not only invented [[wikipedia:Semaphore_(programming)\|semaphore]], but also wrote an [http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD06xx/EWD611.html interesting essay] called ''On the fact that the Atlantic Ocean has two sides'', which, in some parts, nicely contributes to discussion about [[rationalism]], [[empiricism]] and [[cluelessness]]. Here are few quotes I found inspiring.

	== [[Platonic]] or [[Pragmatic]]? ==		== [[Platonic]] or [[Pragmatic]]? ==

JaroslavTulach: /* LISP Manual */

JaroslavTulach — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:47:48 GMT

LISP Manual

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:47, 17 January 2013
Line 34:		Line 34:
	...after an incomplete language definition, that text tries to fill the gaps with an equally incomplete sketch of an —of the?— implementation. Yet LISP 1.5 conquered in the decade after the publication of that manual a major portion of the American academic computing community. This, too, must have had a traceable influence. Why did LISP never get to that position in Europe?		...after an incomplete language definition, that text tries to fill the gaps with an equally incomplete sketch of an —of the?— implementation. Yet LISP 1.5 conquered in the decade after the publication of that manual a major portion of the American academic computing community. This, too, must have had a traceable influence. Why did LISP never get to that position in Europe?

-	That is what [[User:JaroslavTulach\|I]]'d like to know too. But wait, it is not just about LISP. What about [[Perl]], [[Ruby]], [[JavaScript]] and other languages without (prior) specification?	+	That is what [[User:JaroslavTulach\|I]]'d like to know too. But wait, it is not just about LISP. What about [[Perl]], [[Ruby]], [[JavaScript]] and other languages without (prior) [[Chapter 9\|specification]]?

JaroslavTulach: /* LISP */

JaroslavTulach — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:43:32 GMT

LISP

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:43, 17 January 2013
Line 29:		Line 29:
	Time has passed and the situation has not changed. But [[User:JaroslavTulach\|I]] got used to it: Just get ready that users of your technology are completely [[clueless]]. At least think when [[APIDesignPatterns\|designing APIs]] of your technology.		Time has passed and the situation has not changed. But [[User:JaroslavTulach\|I]] got used to it: Just get ready that users of your technology are completely [[clueless]]. At least think when [[APIDesignPatterns\|designing APIs]] of your technology.

-	== LISP ==	+	== LISP Manual ==

JaroslavTulach: /* How difficult is Programming? */

JaroslavTulach — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:43:07 GMT

How difficult is Programming?

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:43, 17 January 2013
Line 27:		Line 27:
	Good programming is probably beyond the intellectual abilities of today's "average programmer". To do, hic et nunc, the job well with today's army of practitioners, many of whom have been lured into a profession beyond their intellectual abilities, is an insoluble problem.		Good programming is probably beyond the intellectual abilities of today's "average programmer". To do, hic et nunc, the job well with today's army of practitioners, many of whom have been lured into a profession beyond their intellectual abilities, is an insoluble problem.

-	Time has passed and the situation has not changed. But [[User:JaroslavTulach\|I]] got used to it: Just get ready that users of your technology are completely [[clueless]].	+	Time has passed and the situation has not changed. But [[User:JaroslavTulach\|I]] got used to it: Just get ready that users of your technology are completely [[clueless]]. At least think when [[APIDesignPatterns\|designing APIs]] of your technology.

	== LISP ==		== LISP ==

JaroslavTulach: /* Platonic or Pragmatic? */

JaroslavTulach — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:39:19 GMT

Platonic or Pragmatic?

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:39, 17 January 2013
Line 3:		Line 3:
	== [[Platonic]] or [[Pragmatic]]? ==		== [[Platonic]] or [[Pragmatic]]? ==

-	Traditionally there are two ways in which science can be justified, the [[Platonic]] and the [[pragmatic]] one. In the [[Platonic]] way — "l'art pour l'art" — science justifies itself by its [[beauty]] and internal consistency, in the [[pragmatic]] way science is justified by the usefulness of its products.	+	Traditionally there are two ways in which science can be justified, the [[Platonic]] and the [[pragmatic]] one. In the [[Platonic]] way — "l'art pour l'art" — science justifies itself by its [[beauty]] and internal consistency, in the [[pragmatic]] way science is justified by the usefulness of its products. My overall impression is that along this scale Europe, for better or for worse, is more [[Platonic]], whereas the USA, and Canada to a lesser extent, are more [[pragmatic]]...
-		+
-	My overall impression is that along this scale Europe, for better or for worse, is more [[Platonic]], whereas the USA, and Canada to a lesser extent, are more [[pragmatic]]...	+

	== Tolerance for '''soft''' science ==		== Tolerance for '''soft''' science ==

JaroslavTulach: /* How difficult is Programming? */

JaroslavTulach — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:38:00 GMT

How difficult is Programming?

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:38, 17 January 2013
Line 30:		Line 30:

	Time has passed and the situation has not changed. But [[User:JaroslavTulach\|I]] got used to it: Just get ready that users of your technology are completely [[clueless]].		Time has passed and the situation has not changed. But [[User:JaroslavTulach\|I]] got used to it: Just get ready that users of your technology are completely [[clueless]].
		+
		+	== LISP ==
		+
		+
		+	...after an incomplete language definition, that text tries to fill the gaps with an equally incomplete sketch of an —of the?— implementation. Yet LISP 1.5 conquered in the decade after the publication of that manual a major portion of the American academic computing community. This, too, must have had a traceable influence. Why did LISP never get to that position in Europe?
		+
		+	That is what [[User:JaroslavTulach\|I]]'d like to know too. But wait, it is not just about LISP. What about [[Perl]], [[Ruby]], [[JavaScript]] and other languages without (prior) specification?

JaroslavTulach: /* More Computing Science and Less Computing */

JaroslavTulach — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:34:04 GMT

More Computing Science and Less Computing

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:34, 17 January 2013
Line 21:		Line 21:
	Finally a difference that is very specific to academic computing science in Europe ... All sorts of explanation are possible: Europe's economic situation in the early fifties...		Finally a difference that is very specific to academic computing science in Europe ... All sorts of explanation are possible: Europe's economic situation in the early fifties...

-	Reminds [[User:JaroslavTulach\|me]] that I was learning programming in [[Karel]] on a computer I put together from paper clips.	+	The first series of machines —that of the singletons— was mainly developed in the USA shortly after the World War II, while a ruined continental Europe had neither the technology, nor the money, to start building computers: the only thing we could do was thinking about them. Therefore it is not surprising that many US Departments of Computer Science are offsprings of Departments of Electrical Engineering, whereas those in Europe started (later) from Departments of Mathematics (of which they are often still a part). This different heritage still colours the departments, and could provide an acceptable explanation that in the USA Computing Science is viewed more operationally than in Europe.
		+
		+	Reminds [[User:JaroslavTulach\|me]] that I was learning programming in [[Karel]] on a computer I put together from paper clips. And of course, I studied programming at [[MatFyz]].

	== How difficult is Programming? ==		== How difficult is Programming? ==

JaroslavTulach: /* More Computing Science and Less Computing */

JaroslavTulach — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:32:13 GMT

More Computing Science and Less Computing

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:32, 17 January 2013
Line 22:		Line 22:

	Reminds [[User:JaroslavTulach\|me]] that I was learning programming in [[Karel]] on a computer I put together from paper clips.		Reminds [[User:JaroslavTulach\|me]] that I was learning programming in [[Karel]] on a computer I put together from paper clips.
		+
		+	== How difficult is Programming? ==
		+
		+	Good programming is probably beyond the intellectual abilities of today's "average programmer". To do, hic et nunc, the job well with today's army of practitioners, many of whom have been lured into a profession beyond their intellectual abilities, is an insoluble problem.
		+
		+	Time has passed and the situation has not changed. But [[User:JaroslavTulach\|I]] got used to it: Just get ready that users of your technology are completely [[clueless]].

JaroslavTulach: /* = */

JaroslavTulach — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:30:26 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:30, 17 January 2013
Line 17:		Line 17:
	Dealing with some aspect of a complex problem "in depth and in isolation" implies two things. "In isolation" means that you are (temporarily) ignoring most other aspects of the original total problem, "in depth" means that you are willing to generalize the aspect under consideration, are willing to investigate variations that are needed for a proper understanding, but are in themselves of no significance within the original problem statement. The true integralist becomes impatient and annoyed at what he feels to be "games"; by his mental make-up he is compelled to remain constantly aware of the whole chain, when asked to focus his attention upon a single link		Dealing with some aspect of a complex problem "in depth and in isolation" implies two things. "In isolation" means that you are (temporarily) ignoring most other aspects of the original total problem, "in depth" means that you are willing to generalize the aspect under consideration, are willing to investigate variations that are needed for a proper understanding, but are in themselves of no significance within the original problem statement. The true integralist becomes impatient and annoyed at what he feels to be "games"; by his mental make-up he is compelled to remain constantly aware of the whole chain, when asked to focus his attention upon a single link

-	== ===	+	== More Computing Science and Less Computing ==

	Finally a difference that is very specific to academic computing science in Europe ... All sorts of explanation are possible: Europe's economic situation in the early fifties...		Finally a difference that is very specific to academic computing science in Europe ... All sorts of explanation are possible: Europe's economic situation in the early fifties...

	Reminds [[User:JaroslavTulach\|me]] that I was learning programming in [[Karel]] on a computer I put together from paper clips.		Reminds [[User:JaroslavTulach\|me]] that I was learning programming in [[Karel]] on a computer I put together from paper clips.

JaroslavTulach at 11:29, 17 January 2013

JaroslavTulach — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:29:39 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 11:29, 17 January 2013
Line 16:		Line 16:

	Dealing with some aspect of a complex problem "in depth and in isolation" implies two things. "In isolation" means that you are (temporarily) ignoring most other aspects of the original total problem, "in depth" means that you are willing to generalize the aspect under consideration, are willing to investigate variations that are needed for a proper understanding, but are in themselves of no significance within the original problem statement. The true integralist becomes impatient and annoyed at what he feels to be "games"; by his mental make-up he is compelled to remain constantly aware of the whole chain, when asked to focus his attention upon a single link		Dealing with some aspect of a complex problem "in depth and in isolation" implies two things. "In isolation" means that you are (temporarily) ignoring most other aspects of the original total problem, "in depth" means that you are willing to generalize the aspect under consideration, are willing to investigate variations that are needed for a proper understanding, but are in themselves of no significance within the original problem statement. The true integralist becomes impatient and annoyed at what he feels to be "games"; by his mental make-up he is compelled to remain constantly aware of the whole chain, when asked to focus his attention upon a single link
		+
		+	== ===
		+
		+	Finally a difference that is very specific to academic computing science in Europe ... All sorts of explanation are possible: Europe's economic situation in the early fifties...
		+
		+	Reminds [[User:JaroslavTulach\|me]] that I was learning programming in [[Karel]] on a computer I put together from paper clips.