X
Xah Lee
Dear computing comrades,
Today, i'd like to show you a piece of literature written by a eminent
mathematician Edsger W Dijkstra.
Here's 2 interesting quote from his letter:
“The prevaling attitude was reflected in the creation of two literary
figures — admittedly of rather poor literature, but nevertheless of
great paralyzing power —, viz. “the average programmer†and “the
casual userâ€. Up to these days, academic research in programming
methodology has been supposed to respect the severe intellectual
limitations of these fictitious morons: consequently any proposal that
required any further education of the programming person was out.â€
“... On the other hand we should be glad that the gospel of design by
derivation rather by trial and error is still preached.â€
I happened to read it today. And, i think in your busy schedule of
checking out slashdot and blogging and driveling with your excitement
and concerns about current fashions and trends with your fellow peers
and factions; It is good once in a while to read something
unfashionable and not for-dummies.
This letter of EWD is about 16 pages.
Is somewhat a quaint rant. The first half i find interesting but
without much sympathy, perhaps because the author is mostly talking
about the situation in the mid 1990s, of which, i'm unfamiliar and too
early a period to touch me personally. But the latter part of the
letter, i find much empathy and concurrence. In particular, his
remarks related to the formal methods.
(for you math illiterates out there: the “formal†here does not mean
the opposite of “informalâ€, as in “formal dress†vs “informal dressâ€.
Rather, “formal†here means “mathematical reasoning by symbol
manipulation; the ‘FORM’ in math FORMulasâ€. (for you mathematicians
out there: the root of the word “formal†as in “formal dress†and
“formalismâ€, actually are the same. They both refers to “form†as in a
empty shell, appearance.)) (So, when you “dress up formally†to attend
your friend's wedding or death ceremony, it literally means you are
putting on a appearance.)
Now, without further ado, the article is at:
“Under the spell of Leibniz's dream†(2000) By Edsger W Dijkstra
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/ewd12xx/EWD1298.PDF
Xah
(e-mail address removed)
∑ http://xahlee.org/
Today, i'd like to show you a piece of literature written by a eminent
mathematician Edsger W Dijkstra.
Here's 2 interesting quote from his letter:
“The prevaling attitude was reflected in the creation of two literary
figures — admittedly of rather poor literature, but nevertheless of
great paralyzing power —, viz. “the average programmer†and “the
casual userâ€. Up to these days, academic research in programming
methodology has been supposed to respect the severe intellectual
limitations of these fictitious morons: consequently any proposal that
required any further education of the programming person was out.â€
“... On the other hand we should be glad that the gospel of design by
derivation rather by trial and error is still preached.â€
I happened to read it today. And, i think in your busy schedule of
checking out slashdot and blogging and driveling with your excitement
and concerns about current fashions and trends with your fellow peers
and factions; It is good once in a while to read something
unfashionable and not for-dummies.
This letter of EWD is about 16 pages.
Is somewhat a quaint rant. The first half i find interesting but
without much sympathy, perhaps because the author is mostly talking
about the situation in the mid 1990s, of which, i'm unfamiliar and too
early a period to touch me personally. But the latter part of the
letter, i find much empathy and concurrence. In particular, his
remarks related to the formal methods.
(for you math illiterates out there: the “formal†here does not mean
the opposite of “informalâ€, as in “formal dress†vs “informal dressâ€.
Rather, “formal†here means “mathematical reasoning by symbol
manipulation; the ‘FORM’ in math FORMulasâ€. (for you mathematicians
out there: the root of the word “formal†as in “formal dress†and
“formalismâ€, actually are the same. They both refers to “form†as in a
empty shell, appearance.)) (So, when you “dress up formally†to attend
your friend's wedding or death ceremony, it literally means you are
putting on a appearance.)
Now, without further ado, the article is at:
“Under the spell of Leibniz's dream†(2000) By Edsger W Dijkstra
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/ewd12xx/EWD1298.PDF
Xah
(e-mail address removed)
∑ http://xahlee.org/
