From: Dan Clemmensen (Dan@Clemmensen.ShireNet.com)
Date: Fri Aug 01 1997 - 16:40:20 MDT
Yakwax2@aol.com wrote:
>
> Question: Why don't more operating systems come with built in programming
> languages and compilers?
>
[SNIP of a long rant]
This is a troll, isn't it? :-)
1) every language since COBOL was supposed to put programmers
out of business. Really. Sorry, but the ability to
construct algorithms requires logical thought processes.
The algorithm designer is a programmer, no matter what
tools are used. In the hands of a competent programmer,
better tools lead to higher productivity and better
programs. In the hands of a non-programmer, better tools
lead to nothing much. I do agree that simpler-to-use tools
lower the learning barrier, but a 5-year-old using Pilot
logically is a programmer, while a company president using
Excel illogically is not.
2) Over the years, there have been many examples of
programming tools integrated in various ways into an operating
system or operating environment. I'm not clear on the
distinction you are trying to make here: Why do you
think UNIX has integrated tools, but Windows does not?
both environments have a distinct OS and Distinct tools.
3) There are a lot of free OSs with freely-available source
code. Linux is a good place to start.
4) Java is the latest and likely the greatest attempt to
achieve true reusability and ease of visual programming.
The javaBeans specification is specifically designed
to permit easy visual programming, and vendor independence
is central to the Java philosophy. Yo can download the
Java Development Kit and the Beans devlopment Kit for free.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:41 MST