Abstractions All The Way

S. Dasgupta
{"title":"Abstractions All The Way","authors":"S. Dasgupta","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190843861.003.0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Creative people are driven by certain inner forces, inner needs that are part cognitive, part affective. One such force is intellectual curiosity: the need to know or understand. Another compelling drive is dissatisfaction with the status quo. We saw this as the force that impelled Nicklaus Wirth into creating Pascal (Chapter 1, Section 1.7). But few in the emerging computer science community of the first age of computer science epitomized this characteristic more fiercely than Edsger W. Dijkstra. In his case his discontent was with the direction programming had taken in the 1960s. And the strength of his dissat­isfaction was never more evident than in a letter to the editor of the Communications of the ACM in 1968. The practice of communicating new scientific results by their discoverers in the form of compact letters to the editors of scientific journals was, of course, well established in the natural sciences. The British journal Nature (London) had established this tradition right from its inaugural issue in 1869. But in an upstart discipline, as computer science still was, this practice as a means of scientific communication was quite un­usual. (In one of his celebrated handwritten “EWD notes,” Dijkstra, reflecting retrospectively, explained that his short paper was published as a letter to bypass the usual publication pipeline and that the editor who made this decision was Nicklaus Wirth.) Dijkstra had long been concerned with the question of program quality and how one may acquire confidence in the reliability or correctness of a program. But, as the title of the letter— “Goto Statement Considered Harmful”— tells us, the object of his discontent lay in the use of the goto statement— the unconditional branch available in one notation or another in most programming languages, including Algol-like ones. Dijkstra claimed that the quality of the programmers decreased as a function of the frequency of the goto statements in their programs. And so he proposed that the goto should be banished from all high- level programming languages.","PeriodicalId":133335,"journal":{"name":"The Second Age of Computer Science","volume":"55 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Second Age of Computer Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190843861.003.0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Creative people are driven by certain inner forces, inner needs that are part cognitive, part affective. One such force is intellectual curiosity: the need to know or understand. Another compelling drive is dissatisfaction with the status quo. We saw this as the force that impelled Nicklaus Wirth into creating Pascal (Chapter 1, Section 1.7). But few in the emerging computer science community of the first age of computer science epitomized this characteristic more fiercely than Edsger W. Dijkstra. In his case his discontent was with the direction programming had taken in the 1960s. And the strength of his dissat­isfaction was never more evident than in a letter to the editor of the Communications of the ACM in 1968. The practice of communicating new scientific results by their discoverers in the form of compact letters to the editors of scientific journals was, of course, well established in the natural sciences. The British journal Nature (London) had established this tradition right from its inaugural issue in 1869. But in an upstart discipline, as computer science still was, this practice as a means of scientific communication was quite un­usual. (In one of his celebrated handwritten “EWD notes,” Dijkstra, reflecting retrospectively, explained that his short paper was published as a letter to bypass the usual publication pipeline and that the editor who made this decision was Nicklaus Wirth.) Dijkstra had long been concerned with the question of program quality and how one may acquire confidence in the reliability or correctness of a program. But, as the title of the letter— “Goto Statement Considered Harmful”— tells us, the object of his discontent lay in the use of the goto statement— the unconditional branch available in one notation or another in most programming languages, including Algol-like ones. Dijkstra claimed that the quality of the programmers decreased as a function of the frequency of the goto statements in their programs. And so he proposed that the goto should be banished from all high- level programming languages.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一直都是抽象
有创造力的人受到某种内在力量的驱动,内在需求部分是认知的,部分是情感的。其中一种力量就是求知欲:求知或理解的需要。另一个令人信服的动力是对现状的不满。我们认为这是促使Nicklaus Wirth创造Pascal的力量(第1章,第1.7节)。但是,在计算机科学第一个时代的新兴计算机科学社区中,很少有人比Edsger W. Dijkstra更强烈地体现了这一特征。对他来说,不满的是20世纪60年代编程的发展方向。1968年,他给《美国计算机协会通讯》(Communications of the ACM)的编辑写了一封信,最明显地表达了他的不满。当然,在自然科学领域,发现者以紧凑的信件形式向科学期刊的编辑传达新的科学成果的做法已经根深蒂固。英国杂志《自然》(伦敦)从1869年创刊开始就确立了这一传统。但在一个新兴学科中,就像计算机科学一样,这种作为科学交流手段的做法是很不寻常的。(在他著名的手写“EWD笔记”中,迪克斯特拉回忆说,他的短文是作为一封信发表的,绕过了通常的出版渠道,做出这个决定的编辑是尼克劳斯·沃思(Nicklaus Wirth)。)Dijkstra长期以来一直关注程序质量问题,以及人们如何对程序的可靠性或正确性获得信心。但是,正如这封信的标题——“Goto语句被认为是有害的”——告诉我们的那样,他不满的对象在于Goto语句的使用——在大多数编程语言中,包括类似algol的语言,以一种或另一种符号提供的无条件分支。Dijkstra声称程序员的质量随着程序中goto语句的频率而下降。因此,他建议将goto从所有高级编程语言中去除。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Abstractions All The Way A Symbolic Science Of Intelligence Algol Genes Getting To Know Parallelism Very Formal Affairs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1