<html><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>In linguistics there was a longstanding debate about whether or not the languages one spoke affected what sorts of thoughts were available to one; it was a big theme in Orwell's 1984, for example. </div><div><br></div><div>Before Ruby and then Smalltalk, (until Ruby I hadn't really looked at any functional programming seriously,) I wouldn't know how to use a closure. I might not even have known the term. </div><div><br></div><div>In general it seems that linguists have largely abandoned this notion, but it sure does seem pertinent to programming, doesn't it?<br><br>On Feb 17, 2011, at 6:27 AM, Michael Latta <<a href="mailto:lattam@mac.com">lattam@mac.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<span style="display:none"> </span>
<div id="ygrp-text">
<p>I agree. The language you use has a huge impact on how you approach a problem. In college we had a course that exposed us to 10 languages for that very point. The programmers that have only used one language are crippled in many ways. <br>
<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
On Feb 17, 2011, at 7:03 AM, "Jecel Assumpcao Jr." <<a href="mailto:jecel%40merlintec.com"><a href="mailto:jecel@merlintec.com">jecel@merlintec.com</a></a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> I was taking a class once and the teacher proposed a problem where you<br>
> had to number the squares in a crossword puzzle. Only squares which were<br>
> the start of two or more horizontal or vertical spaces were to be<br>
> numbered.<br>
> <br>
> She called me to the blackboard and told be to start drawing an NS chart<br>
> (<a href="http://www.hit.ac.il/staff/leonidm/information-systems/ch56.html"><a href="http://www.hit.ac.il/staff/leonidm/information-systems/ch56.html">http://www.hit.ac.il/staff/leonidm/information-systems/ch56.html</a></a>) and I<br>
> said we first had to decide what language the program would be written<br>
> in. She claimed that the language you use has no effect on how you think<br>
> about the problem, and in this case there would always be three nested<br>
> loops. That is not something you should ever say to me :-) I told her<br>
> that if I used APL there would be no loops. So she said the language<br>
> would be Pascal and I finished the program for her.<br>
> <br>
> The following class I have her the APL version as a present. I could<br>
> have written it in one line, but did it in four instead to make it more<br>
> readable :-)<br>
> <br>
> -- Jecel<br>
> <br>
> David Harris wrote on Wed, 16 Feb 2011 21:37:37 -0800<br>
>> <br>
>> I did LU decomposition and backward substitution in two lines of APL.<br>
>> Oh, and TicTacToe in two lines as well, as I recall. Of course they weren't<br>
>> terribly understandable :-) That was back when we had a IBM370/145<br>
>> with APL microcode, and Selectric terminals --- ah, the good ol' days. <br>
>> David<br>
>> <br>
>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Michael Latta wrote:<br>
>> <br>
>> I did a full z80 simulator and console in APL in 11 pages of loosely<br>
>> formatted code. For some tasks it is very effective. <br>
>> <br>
>> Michael<br>
>> On Feb 16, 2011, at 5:00 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote:<br>
>> <br>
>> I think I saw a talk on YouTube where someone aced a project that<br>
>> way. Used APL too if I remember right. Think they guy's name was<br>
>> David something or other?<br>
>> <br>
>> On Feb 9, 2011, at 3:35 PM, ungar wrote:<br>
>> <br>
>> <br>
>> <br>
>> Can't help you too much, but if you want to be clever, write it in a<br>
>> dynamic language like APL or Smalltalk! (Or Lisp...)<br>
>> - David<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> ------------------------------------<br>
> <br>
> Yahoo! Groups Links<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
</p>
</div>
<!-- end group email -->
</div></blockquote></body></html>