> On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 00:07 +0200, Julian Rohrhuber wrote:
>> that sounds very interesting. what makes this language more
>> conversational than others?
>
> Some more about it here:
>
> http://hopl.murdoch.edu.au/showlanguage2.prx?exp=228
>
> It seems it was a precursor to smalltalk, and is properly known as LC
> squared.
>
> LC2 seems a good search term, leading to this interesting paper
> "building dynamic programs" by Peter Brown:
> http://historical.ncstrl.org/litesite-data/stan/CS-TR-81-838.pdf
>
> I like the idea of a program having "loose ends" that a programmer fills
> in while it's running, and then running a checker that makes sure that
> the loose ends are tied up before passing the finished program on to the
> end user.
this sounds a bit like the test driven programming method, where you write
the all the tests first (sometimes this is done by another programmer),
then when all the tests pass you've finished. this is the reverse of how
most people do it, but it's much more effective.
loose ends has a much nicer sound to it though :)
I cant find LC2 on this, but it might be a good time to send it round
again anyway:
http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/oreilly/news/languageposter_0504.html
cheers,
dave
Received on Thu Sep 21 2006 - 08:38:52 BST