Timeo danaos et dona ferentes

A response to “Notations. There is no escape”

Arnaud Bailly - @dr_c0d3

2022-06-14

Caveat Emptor

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/NAMA_Masque_esclave.jpg

Not sure what a “respondent” is supposed to do…
I am just a practitioner, practicing “philosophy” as an amateur

What’s the Curse About?

Notation as a negotiation between a Human and a Machine
It can be more or less detached from the actual computing model (eg. abstract)

Notation as a negotiation between a “domain” and “computing”
Programmability dimension, how far can you depart from what’s pre-built in the notation
Problematic in itself: Domains do not exist in vacuum, they are also changed by their relation to machines

Notation as a representation of how humans talk about their domains
Domain Specific Languages, “trade jargon”

The dream of BDD: Expressing the “problem” in the language of the “domain experts”
DDD: using the language of the domain in the “solution space”
Removing intermediates (eg. Business Analysts, Product Managers)

Notation as way to negotiate meaning between humans
Famous Abelson & Sussman quote about reading vs. writing, human consumption
Programming is a translation process between “domains”, but it’s impure

Notations are Social Too

Taking the Linguistic approach seriously: Notations are social through and through
- Structure of powers are embedded in notations and their use
Distiguishing “High-level” vs “Low-level” languages entail a certain world view
“Design” vs. “Implementation” reenacts the old dichotomy of thought vs. matter, thinking vs. doing, Poiesis vs. Praxis

Use of more or less complex formalisms to provide “semantics” to notations
“My language is bigger than yours” phenomenon, aka. C++ syndrom
Failure of separating Design (UML) from implementation (Code generation + some remains…) -> code fights back