A philosopher's question
-
Imagine that I use to explore with my mind a particular topic and I want to map and model the mechanics of that exploration. That's mostly metaphysical. I have a partner called "name a programming language" with whom I must communicate in its terms. Which would be that best programming language, and which would be the basics that I must "know" in order to pass my ideas to him properly? Since I'm a philosopher, with this I mean using the elements of my natural language skills that match with the language syntax, and using them in the proper context, in order to "program" at the highest level possible. It's true that my program won't run yet but for me this is not an obstacle at all (yet), as when one writes a book one can start by writing the index. Some programmers will consider this index or highest level programming (so to speak) as mostly void stuff coz it lacks of the proper mathematical meat that the interpreter use to eat in order to do lots of things that look amazingly useful, and in a sense they are right. But that's not the point. The point is that as soon as I can I would start to dig deeper in that structure and build the proper meat that my highest level labels are still just naming. What if using my ability to name what I actually think and recognize the path of whichever method I call for my object of thinking, I'd like to start setting a context for further immersion (immersion with advanced mathematical notation and that? Somebody commented me about a couple of basic elements of mathematical notation which I'm familiarized with, like +, -, /, =, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0, (), etc. I think I know that any programming language has its set of keywords, and that there's also a proper way in which one must express structures in a given language, proper way which I'm not familiarized with but I'm able to learn. Does this sound possible? For me, starting with a programming language is an affair of connecting with it. It's not about including it in me or including me in it, but a kind of symbiotic relationship. Unless for me, using my natural language as far as I can, but constrained (formalized) by the programming language's syntax in order to model using objects and describing methods and classes that are still unable to run (yet) seems to be a good starting point for a symbiotic relationship. Understanding might depend on my ability to set myself in the shoes of another. Any clue? This is a real goal that I'm looking to accomplish, so any question that would clarify a bit more m
-
Imagine that I use to explore with my mind a particular topic and I want to map and model the mechanics of that exploration. That's mostly metaphysical. I have a partner called "name a programming language" with whom I must communicate in its terms. Which would be that best programming language, and which would be the basics that I must "know" in order to pass my ideas to him properly? Since I'm a philosopher, with this I mean using the elements of my natural language skills that match with the language syntax, and using them in the proper context, in order to "program" at the highest level possible. It's true that my program won't run yet but for me this is not an obstacle at all (yet), as when one writes a book one can start by writing the index. Some programmers will consider this index or highest level programming (so to speak) as mostly void stuff coz it lacks of the proper mathematical meat that the interpreter use to eat in order to do lots of things that look amazingly useful, and in a sense they are right. But that's not the point. The point is that as soon as I can I would start to dig deeper in that structure and build the proper meat that my highest level labels are still just naming. What if using my ability to name what I actually think and recognize the path of whichever method I call for my object of thinking, I'd like to start setting a context for further immersion (immersion with advanced mathematical notation and that? Somebody commented me about a couple of basic elements of mathematical notation which I'm familiarized with, like +, -, /, =, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0, (), etc. I think I know that any programming language has its set of keywords, and that there's also a proper way in which one must express structures in a given language, proper way which I'm not familiarized with but I'm able to learn. Does this sound possible? For me, starting with a programming language is an affair of connecting with it. It's not about including it in me or including me in it, but a kind of symbiotic relationship. Unless for me, using my natural language as far as I can, but constrained (formalized) by the programming language's syntax in order to model using objects and describing methods and classes that are still unable to run (yet) seems to be a good starting point for a symbiotic relationship. Understanding might depend on my ability to set myself in the shoes of another. Any clue? This is a real goal that I'm looking to accomplish, so any question that would clarify a bit more m
Funnily enough, we had someone here a while back who went by the pseudonym "The Grand Negus". He came up with this[^]. I had a play with it - it wasn't suited to my needs with regards to commercial development, but it was fun to play with. You might get some joy from this.
I was brought up to respect my elders. I don't respect many people nowadays.
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier -
Imagine that I use to explore with my mind a particular topic and I want to map and model the mechanics of that exploration. That's mostly metaphysical. I have a partner called "name a programming language" with whom I must communicate in its terms. Which would be that best programming language, and which would be the basics that I must "know" in order to pass my ideas to him properly? Since I'm a philosopher, with this I mean using the elements of my natural language skills that match with the language syntax, and using them in the proper context, in order to "program" at the highest level possible. It's true that my program won't run yet but for me this is not an obstacle at all (yet), as when one writes a book one can start by writing the index. Some programmers will consider this index or highest level programming (so to speak) as mostly void stuff coz it lacks of the proper mathematical meat that the interpreter use to eat in order to do lots of things that look amazingly useful, and in a sense they are right. But that's not the point. The point is that as soon as I can I would start to dig deeper in that structure and build the proper meat that my highest level labels are still just naming. What if using my ability to name what I actually think and recognize the path of whichever method I call for my object of thinking, I'd like to start setting a context for further immersion (immersion with advanced mathematical notation and that? Somebody commented me about a couple of basic elements of mathematical notation which I'm familiarized with, like +, -, /, =, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0, (), etc. I think I know that any programming language has its set of keywords, and that there's also a proper way in which one must express structures in a given language, proper way which I'm not familiarized with but I'm able to learn. Does this sound possible? For me, starting with a programming language is an affair of connecting with it. It's not about including it in me or including me in it, but a kind of symbiotic relationship. Unless for me, using my natural language as far as I can, but constrained (formalized) by the programming language's syntax in order to model using objects and describing methods and classes that are still unable to run (yet) seems to be a good starting point for a symbiotic relationship. Understanding might depend on my ability to set myself in the shoes of another. Any clue? This is a real goal that I'm looking to accomplish, so any question that would clarify a bit more m
Its quite tricky, but try to post this question at likeplum. I always get good answers there to my computer/programming issues and questions. They have programmers online to help you now. You can get a great answer to your question so fast. https://www.likeplum.com/help/programming?aid=3321
-
Imagine that I use to explore with my mind a particular topic and I want to map and model the mechanics of that exploration. That's mostly metaphysical. I have a partner called "name a programming language" with whom I must communicate in its terms. Which would be that best programming language, and which would be the basics that I must "know" in order to pass my ideas to him properly? Since I'm a philosopher, with this I mean using the elements of my natural language skills that match with the language syntax, and using them in the proper context, in order to "program" at the highest level possible. It's true that my program won't run yet but for me this is not an obstacle at all (yet), as when one writes a book one can start by writing the index. Some programmers will consider this index or highest level programming (so to speak) as mostly void stuff coz it lacks of the proper mathematical meat that the interpreter use to eat in order to do lots of things that look amazingly useful, and in a sense they are right. But that's not the point. The point is that as soon as I can I would start to dig deeper in that structure and build the proper meat that my highest level labels are still just naming. What if using my ability to name what I actually think and recognize the path of whichever method I call for my object of thinking, I'd like to start setting a context for further immersion (immersion with advanced mathematical notation and that? Somebody commented me about a couple of basic elements of mathematical notation which I'm familiarized with, like +, -, /, =, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0, (), etc. I think I know that any programming language has its set of keywords, and that there's also a proper way in which one must express structures in a given language, proper way which I'm not familiarized with but I'm able to learn. Does this sound possible? For me, starting with a programming language is an affair of connecting with it. It's not about including it in me or including me in it, but a kind of symbiotic relationship. Unless for me, using my natural language as far as I can, but constrained (formalized) by the programming language's syntax in order to model using objects and describing methods and classes that are still unable to run (yet) seems to be a good starting point for a symbiotic relationship. Understanding might depend on my ability to set myself in the shoes of another. Any clue? This is a real goal that I'm looking to accomplish, so any question that would clarify a bit more m
These LV bargain Chanel accoutrements on auction for rolex replica women are appearance icons itself and play a basic role in appearance world. These differentiate themselves from the accepted handbags from design, actual superior which are bigger than the ordinary. The abstracts acclimated to accomplish the branded purses are abundant added big-ticket and bigger in quality, this added reinforces the acceptability of the branded. The accomplishment and activity to accomplish the artist accoutrements for beneath amount abundant compared to added companies. The ability of the branded handbags is amazing, humans will absorb canicule aggravating to clue down the new account from a assertive collection. No admiration bargain artist purses broad aperture from ceramics are added and added popular.It becomes boxy to rolex replica backpack accouterments after a bag. We accept abstract the accent of handbags in our activity that they accept become an addiction!During the beforehand times, if handbags acquired acceptance a part of women as a appearance accessory, again it was a appearance account but a call to replica bags backpack stuff. However, it did not endure for long, the ladies started to get bedeviled with handbags to bout every accouterments they carried. A ladies bag is the a lot of accepted appearance accent beat by women and is, acutely noticeable.