Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bbn!uwmcsd1!ig!agate!pasteur!ic.Berkeley.EDU!faustus
From: faustus@ic.Berkeley.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Universal Programming Languge (was: Universal OS)
Message-ID: <3344@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu>
Date: 14 May 88 03:21:15 GMT
References: <4082@killer.UUCP> <769@imagine.PAWL.RPI.EDU> <76700017@uiucdcsp> <843@actnyc.UUCP> <4723@ihlpf.ATT.COM>
Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu
Lines: 26

In article <4082@killer.UUCP>, loci@killer.UUCP (loci!clb) writes:
> 	No no! Look at the machine language for ANY processor on the market
> 	today: they include mathematical operations like add, subtract,
> 	and, or, xor, cmp, etc. Anything else you think you see isn't
> 	there.

Hmm, "jmp" isn't there?  Registers aren't there?

> 	First thing to do to solve this problem is to educate people
> 	in mathematics. Then it may be possible to find good algorithms
> 	to solve differential equations in a programmable language.

Are you educated in mathematics?  Can you find these algorithms?  Come on,
put your money where your mouth is.  Let's see some results.  Or are you
going to claim that you're not a good enough mathematician to do these
things yourself?  If not, you shouldn't be telling your betters what's
good for them.

Maybe I've missed something important -- what is the problem you're trying
to solve, anyway?  You don't like the existing programming paradigms?
Why not?  Because it's too hard to write good code in them?  Not for
good programmers.  Because they're "ugly"?  That's too subjective -- I
don't think they're ugly.  Because you want to do something new and
different, and leave your mark on the history of computing?  Probably...

	Wayne