tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jun 11 12:05:48 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Klingon prog language
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Klingon prog language
- Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 15:05:34 -0400 (EDT)
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]> (message from Chocolateon Tue, 11 Jun 1996 09:59:06 -0700)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 09:59:06 -0700
>From: Chocolate <[email protected]>
>And now for the "but...":
>This is a _very_ interesting topic: What (high level) programming
>languages were/are the Klingons using? What's the syntax like?
>What are the commands?
I think it's safe to say that the programming languages in use by the
HUMANS at the time of Star Trek are likely nothing whatever like we're
using now. Modern computer languages would have been unrecognizable as
such 30 years ago, and we're talking centuries in the future. It's likely
nobody programs computers then; they're too complicated to be programmed by
anything except other computers, which perhaps eventually get some sort of
guilelines in the form of natural language processing (which we know works
in ST's time frame).
>I think it would be great to have a prog lang that fits _EXACTLY_
>the way a Klingon thinks. Why don't develop something like this,
>just for the fun of it?
For all the fun of Klingon, I'd much rather have a prog lang that fits
_EXACTLY_ the way a Human thinks... and I've yet to see that! And we
certainly know more about how Humans think than how Klingons think. You
want the most natural language? It's the programmer's native language,
whatever that may be. Simple enough?
~mark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface
iQB1AwUBMb3DeMppGeTJXWZ9AQHu8wL+PKPg/I8/0k9JAAKz5bZBP6hm/iCfSyDt
alFG6XtJiQm4ORysStDN6EroRbmHtY4TA30vVohquUJZjRNj7U5keK7DqgVgEhxn
iwaM4w1GrdfXZ8WiL5Iv3hJAi0t9MxYq
=jheH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----