From: no.top.post@...
Date: 2011-05-30T23:45:27+09:00
Subject: Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation.

I taken time to absorb the feedback, from this lively thread
which I originated.

> > Can anybody point me to an on-line minimal formal
> > syntax for ruby, so as to not rely on the chatty tutors.
> > We want a train-time-table format; not a novel.
Clifford Heath wrote:-
> No such syntax description exists. Even if it did, a syntax
> directed editor probably wouldn't work very well for Ruby.

OK, a syntax directed editor is too much like AI: can guarantee to
give you the 7th root of 143 within 1% acuracy. Let's rather think
of an 'expert system', which helps you. Eg. syntax colouring which
I've already got, helps a lot.  Would it be viable to have a library
menu of 'primitive' constructs, or would you soon find that you
MUST have various 'irregular' features to build anything?
================
> > The superficial simplicity is deceptive.
> 
> The absence of explicit form (like missing method-call parentheses, for
> example) allows the syntax to be used to construct very natural and
> fluid DSLs, but opens up significant complexity in parsing.
> 
Yes the 'fluid' 'close to natural language' is exactly what I oppose.

> FWIW, I've been in the industry for 30 years, and have led teams that
> built software products that are still deployed on millions of enterprise
> machines around the globe, running corporations with household names.
> 
Nobody's denying that you're brilliant.

> When I chose to learn Ruby (in 2002), I felt a renewed joy in programming
> that I hadn't felt in years.  

I believe you. You needed a challenge. Some people buy a motorbike,
or a skate-board.

> That was the experience of many here, BTW.
> Call it childish if you will, but that's an ignorant point of view, and a
> completely gratuitous comment, coming from an outsider.

Child-like might be good.
You'll not get the truth from INSIDE incestious back-patting.

I've experience a similar clash of views: with my want for formal &
away from natural language, I'm a heavy user of `mc`, which is the
*nix clone/improvement of a DOS utility.  It's menu-driven: almost
spreadsheet-like.  Many competent 'users' skoff at it.  Because instead
of 'looking and pressing one key', like you do when you get in an
elevator/lift, they want the pleasure of 'writing a near english
message to the little man in the box' - aka 'command line...'.

BTW what did you think of the Exel/M$/space-flight man's
writeup on <the disadvantage of many degrees of freedom>?

Thanks.