From: Kevin <darkintent@...>
Date: 2011-04-13T15:46:38+09:00
Subject: Re: functional paradigm taking over

--0016e6db297887139704a0c72b47
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Before anyone bothers syntax would still apply even if one could simply use
English to give instructions and we were able to skip over the symbols, by
that time it would probably be possible to type English in order to create a
program or a subset of it.

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 2:38 AM, Kevin <darkintent@gmail.com> wrote:

> That is all well and good. But does that fact make the definitions I am
> using incorrect in any way?  Does it necessarily make the suggestion that
> excel is a programming language incorrect?  Someone posted a link to an
> animation done in Excel (I've seen something similar in the past.), is that
> not giving instructions to a computer as per definition twelve?  Heck if you
> were to speak to a computer using English you could give instructions to a
> computer.  As voice recognition technology gets better and hopefully cheaper
> people who are not great at typing may do just that in order to create
> programs that would be no different from the ones we type currently.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 2:02 AM, Josh Cheek <josh.cheek@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Kevin <darkintent@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Why don't you actually go take a look at the definition of language,
>> > specifically definitions three,four,five, and seven here:
>> > http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/language
>> >
>> >
>> The rest of us are talking about definition twelve.
>>
>
>

--0016e6db297887139704a0c72b47--