Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages

On 14.10.2024 10:23, Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org wrote:

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024 18:28:32 +0200
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> boring babbled:

[ X-post list reduced ]
>
On 13.10.2024 18:02, Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org wrote:

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024 15:30:03 -0000 (UTC)
cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) boring babbled:

[...]

>
No.  It translates one computer _language_ to another computer
_language_.  In the usual case, that's from a textual source

>
Machine code isn't a language. Fallen at the first hurdle with that
definition.

>
Careful (myself included); watch out for the glazed frost!
>
You know there's formal definitions for what constitutes languages.
>
At first glance I don't see why machine code wouldn't quality as a
language (either as some specific "mnemonic" representation, or as
a sequence of integral numbers or other "code" representations).
What's the problem, in your opinion, with considering machine code
as a language?

 
A programming language is an abstraction of machine instructions that is
readable by people.

Yes, you can explain "programming language" that way.

The topic that was cited (Aho, et al.) upthread (and what I spoke
about) was more generally about [formal] "language", the base also
of programming languages.

(In early days of computers they programmed in binary, but that is
just a side note and unnecessary to support the definition of the
upthread cited text.)

Janis