Fredrik BülowJun 6
jmac

RE: https://hachyderm.io/@inthehands/116695414416647626

Oh! This is such a good framing for a misunderstanding about the role of code I don't think I've seen before.

Truth: Code is an encoding of intent. As with any kind of instruction, brevity is power. This, we know.

But, the fallacy: Code is a sort of fuel, made of symbols, that you pour into a computer to make it do stuff. Common sense tells us: more is better!

I can totally see how you’d start at one and arrive at the other. And it happens! So often! All the time! For our whole lives! Agh!

Jun 5 at 5:01pmWeb
Show threadJordanJun 5
@jmac @inthehands "code is expression of intent" is at the core of my love of programming languages and my quiet belief that it is a Human-Computer Interaction field.
Show threadPaul CantrellJun 5
@jrose @jmac
Yes!! I’ll often ramble on about how UX is a core concern, a •defining• concern, in p-lang design.
Show threadDaniel D. BeckJun 5
@jmac This is encoding of intent is where I get out of sorts about generated software "documentation." Docs aren't _really_ descriptive. They're a statement of commitment to users about what software behaviors they may rely on. So generated code and generated docs have this in common: generate enough and you'll start making promises that cannot be kept or were false to begin with.