Talk:Intentional programming: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 14:43, 14 November 2007

Latest revision as of 14:20, 2 March 2025

(22 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Talk header}}

{{Old XfD multi| date = 18 February 2015 (UTC) | result = '''no consensus''' | page = Intentional programming }}

{{WikiProject banner shell|

{{WikiProject Computing|importance=Low}}

{{WikiProject Computer science|importance=Mid}}

{{WikiProject Software|importance=Mid}}

}}

==Editing Model, Not Programming Model==

This article doesn't really seem to be covering what the thing actually is. It's a CAD program for code, with no ramifications for runtime.

Looks to me Intentional Programming is storing code in a graph database, and an editor for that. Variables and operators have UUID naming, which it hides from you. It is a database so no whitespace, and no need to pair open and close brackets because it's just an abstract syntax tree. A YouTube video shows logic operators in C rendering as circuits, or code blocks as boxes.

Is there really any other idea in it? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/67.2.62.149|67.2.62.149]] ([[User talk:67.2.62.149#top|talk]]) 13:36, 28 March 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

==What book?==

"A very good overview of intentional programming is given in the Chapter 11 of the book [2]."

What's that mean? What's 'the book'? Yes, I can get the title from the footnote, but there's some context missing for that sentence. [[Special:Contributions/124.171.79.68|124.171.79.68]] ([[User talk:124.171.79.68|talk]]) 07:30, 19 December 2007 (UTC)Jac

No response, so I changed the sentence. [[Special:Contributions/124.171.109.199|124.171.109.199]] ([[User talk:124.171.109.199|talk]]) 12:23, 4 January 2008 (UTC) Jac

I'd go so far as to say that this is pure publicity for the book in question. I seriously question the relevance. Is this the only book giving an overview? Is it in any way special? IMHO this sentence is spam and should be deleted. [[Special:Contributions/82.95.90.204|82.95.90.204]] ([[User talk:82.95.90.204|talk]]) 08:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Here is a Java class that, when saved to the file WhichI.java, will compile and illustrate the point being made correctly.

<syntaxhighlight lang="text">

<code>

public class WhichI {

public static String i = "am canadian";

Line 11 ⟶ 37:

}

}

</syntaxhighlight>

</code>

I think that the none functioning example in the text should be replaced with this one.

Line 21 ⟶ 47:

:I disagree. There are at least 10 researchers beside myself around the world that I know would like this page to stay. This page is a good place to accumulate knowledge about IP. I know, intentional programming might seem weird and proprietary to some, but Wikipedia should anyway provide information to those who need it, regardless how geeky this information might seem to others. And there are really people like me with research interests that closely watch IntentSoft and other developments, like LOP etc. Thanks. [[User:KirillOsenkov|KirillOsenkov]] 09:41, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

:I think there must be at least 11 researchers who would like this page to stay.

:I think there must be at least 11 researchers who would like this page to stay. [[User:84.96.44.82Feraudyh|84.96.44.82Feraudyh]] 14:4346, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

:I'm pretty sure this page is being used mainly to talk up a questionable company (I recently received a buzzword-filled recruitment email linking to this page and not much else). [[User:Darklink259|Darklink259]] 11:16, 17 February 2015

------------------------------------

Line 45 ⟶ 73:

:No, I don't think so. - [[User:Furrykef|furrykef]] ([[User_talk:Furrykef|Talk at me]]) 22:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

== NPOV? ==

I feel the article is somewhat NPOV. For instance in the introduction, where we read

: "intentional programming is a collection of concepts which enable software source code

: to reflect the precise information, called intention, which programmers had in mind

: when conceiving their work."

This sounds like a marketing claim, more than an undisputable fact.

--[[User:Ketil]]

:: No. It is a definition. A marketing claim would be if some company said "My product is intentional programming". Of course their product could be pure garbage... This page is a definition, and it does not (or should not) assert that the instantiations of that idea are perfect representations of programmer intent. [[User:Fresheneesz|Fresheneesz]] ([[User talk:Fresheneesz|talk]]) 19:58, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

== Python ==

It actually sounds a lot like what Python achieves and focuses on as a programming language.

[[Special:Contributions/210.215.140.180|210.215.140.180]] ([[User talk:210.215.140.180|talk]]) 17:36, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

== An ad for "Intentional Software"? ==

This article reads like an ad for Charles Simonyi's company, Intentional Software. Almost all of the citations are either works by Mr. Simonyi or interviews with Mr. Simonyi.

[[User:Ozymandias42|Ozymandias42]] ([[User talk:Ozymandias42|talk]]) 05:55, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

== Technology Review links ==

The old paginated links for Technology Review were missing, and the Wayback Machine excludes its copy. I found where the same article is posted now (it contains the quote) and updated+archived the links, but it does mess up the dating on some of the references: it sounds like it was originally published in two parts on January 8 and 9, the currently online version says January 1. So perhaps instead of what I did the old dead links should have been kept and the new one should be added as an alternative? Or the dates should be changed the Jan 1? [[User:Agashlin|Agashlin]] ([[User talk:Agashlin|talk]]) 16:01, 20 September 2020 (UTC)