> Today Routin discerned that Polys is playing a language game with himself, and, growing bored of the language in which Polys typically thinks, wanted to hear something in a different language for the joy of it. However, Routin doesn’t know anything about language, but he knows someone who does. He sends Reqla and Resnak to the one and only gremlin translation company.<p>And -<p>> Avoiding humility or feeling silly or stroking a big ego are not valid (moral) reasons to preclude something that may otherwise lead to progress in an area that is difficult. If you are a very intelligent person, and you find that you have a hard time letting go of the need to midas-touch everything you interact with, you may be contributing to the problem of difficult to maintain and difficult to reason about software.<p>If the argument is “story design your systems”, and this is what we get, it’s just too much for me.
From my brief reading of this, the idea is to link programming concepts to more understandable concepts, primarily using aesthetic and story-telling techniques that many are already familiar with. A noble goal, except the variation among people's aesthetic preferences are huge.<p>Would you have to have two programming languages for two people who like sci-fi versus history? Or how about teen drama versus high art?<p>Linking programming to these extremely subjective aesthetics is a worthy effort to make programming more accessible, but one that is not entirely workable across personal preferences.
Several literature on the subject which has not been mentioned in this article:<p>- Behavioral Programming <a href="http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~bprogram/" rel="nofollow">http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~bprogram/</a><p>- Live Sequence Charts (LSCs) <a href="http://wiki.weizmann.ac.il/playgo/index.php/Live_sequence_charts" rel="nofollow">http://wiki.weizmann.ac.il/playgo/index.php/Live_sequence_ch...</a>