Topic: Programming art
(I am sorry for a pun, it will be a question not of Whip work). I suggest to share thoughts on esthetic aspect of programming. What do I mean? Programming is an expression of algorithm in some arbitrary (one of it is uncountable possible) the form, and its result - the program - can be object of an esthetic estimation, i.e. can cause a certain sort the experience similar to when we perceive objects of traditional art, and this experience can be expressed adequately in the same terms that the art critic uses. (The in itself algorithm, most likely, the beautiful or ugly cannot be, as is not the expression form). We take, for example, FizzBuzz. More low - typical variants of its implementation: Haskell: main = mapM_ (putStrLn. fizzbuzz) [1. 100] fizzbuzz x | x ` mod ` 15 == 0 = "FizzBuzz" | x ` mod ` 3 == 0 = "Fizz" | x ` mod ` 5 == 0 = "Buzz" | otherwise = show x Perl: say ' Fizz ' x $ _ %% 3 ~ ' Buzz ' x $ _ %% 5 || $ _ for 1. 100; PicoLisp: (for N 100 (prinl (or (pack (at (0. 3) "Fizz") (at (0. 5) "Buzz")) N))) Peloton: <@ DEFUDRLIT> __ FizzBuzz|<@ SAW> <@ TSTMD0PARLIT> 1|3 </> <@ TSTMD0PARLIT> 1|5 </> <@ O12><@ SAYLIT> Fizz </> </> <@ O22><@ SAYLIT> Buzz </> </> <@ BTH><@ SAYLIT> FizzBuzz </> </> <@ NTH><@ SAYPAR> 1 </> </> </> </> <@ ITEFORLITLIT> 100|<@ ACTUDRPOSFOR> __ FizzBuzz |... </> </> That we (i.e.) see? The variant on Haskelle is that banality occurs to the first, i.e. The decision on a pearl - the shortest, but thus tangled, careless - all is sacrificed to short. And here a variant on - clear, elegant, not banal - it is possible to tell, beautiful. The final program is resulted for contrast. What does it mean in practice? That there are languages programming more and less beautiful. For example, it is possible to assume that With simply more beautiful With ++, and .... ... I Hope, it was easier what to read this post, than it to write.