Premium Content

Get Premium Content and take advantage of the full potential available in Stories, Links and the Download Area.
Register as a regular user, it's free, and become a community member, share your knowledge or start promoting Cobol in open source.

Topics

User Functions

Older Stories


Welcome to myCobol.net Saturday, 29 April 2017, 09:31 @ CEST

Computer Instruction Languages require a Belief System.

Cobol Salon
  • Tuesday, 01 October 2013, 13:34 @ CEST
  • Contributed by:
  • Views:
    2,806
The term CIL stands for concepts that we indicate in general as being a Computer Programming Language (i.e. assembler, basic, java, fortran, cobol and such). These concepts can come in scripted versions (machine interpreted), compiled into native instruction sets, be it emulated or micro coded and they come in hybrid forms using a symbolic intermediate language. And even virtual versions will appear, using a imaginary machine with a custom instruction set, be it a general purpose virtual machine or a completely customized virtual model.

The tenet is that such constructed language requires a belief system. That may be the belief system of the constructor or the belief system of the user. We would agree that Fortran is suitable for scientific problems and solves them in a procedural way, that Algol is a language for algorithm development, Cobol is suitable for business endeavors, basic and such was intended for interactivity, and so on. In short, them languages are coping with their own, often loosely defined, problem type set. The underlying metaphor is that a specific problem type, the endeavors, the solutions and the methods to engage with these problems, form a belief system.

Side step. That specific problem types requires specific approaches (resulting in specific thinking abilities) can be easily deducted from mathematics. F.i. specific points in space can be described with a vector (a generic construct). A vector for the point in 3D space can be described with coordinates x, y and z, but also with r, phi and z, being r the radius and phi the angle. The only common concept these coordinate systems share is O, the origin: the vector (0,0,0) in both systems. And while we use Euclidean geometry in the first system, we solve other problems in the second using frequencies, waves and convex bodies. Well, basically spoken.

Mapping the tenet with common reality will result in a surprising metaphor usage.
A belief system will be equipped with dogma's, rituals, community builds and conceptual prognoses for the future. Anchored belief systems will even create wars, separation and diaspora. That's a consequence when belief systems evolute into religion. We'll see scientists by the book, guru's, godlike attributions and more of such. And worse, we'll see believers of one religion fight for the truth with believers of the other religions. Because, all belief systems pretend to be true.
But every religion has its charm, won't they? When I committed sin, I'll turn to Rome to become forgiven, when I want 72 virgins I'll turn to Mekka and start jihad, and I could plan my next lovely live in Nirvana by reincarnation as Buddha suggests.

Would you encounter java programmers that solve (some) problems in Cobol? Or visual studio users that integrate a Haskell solution? Do we need a Kant to enlighten our belief system? What? Big Data?

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.