see tex file
we start our journey here. basically, we look at what programmers say when they talk about beautiful code.
we see there are different kinds of lexical fields of beauty, also by including examples, which might be devoid of context for now
but we also see that all these kinds might relate to understanding. so we turn to this next
so what’s up with understanding? turns out code is tricky to understand because
it has to talk to machines
and to humans
slide 25 shows the relation between quantity and quality and code and speech in computer systems link
but maybe we can get more by relating it to other fields of aesthetics and see what they have to offer
complexity to understand streams: https://hapoc2021.sciencesconf.org/data/pages/_Biboudis_streams_hapoc2021_slides.pdf
moved from craft:
also note the place and role of tools (IDEs, teletypes, fast compiling, etc.)
%or at least the role of knowledge, mind as matter:https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11023-007-9060-8
here, we look at how literature, architecture and maths deal with beauty and understanding
now that we have stronger concepts, let’s dive back into code
here is where we develop more our theory.
as we have our typology, we realize that they are all a bit all over the place. is there something that binds them all? yes, programming languages, so we turn to that next to see how a medium/object/material can meet all those at once
we see how programming languages deal with understanding between computers and humans, and how they have to provide an interface to deal with meaning.
A theorem, however, is (see above) only useful if we can apply it under a minimum number of clear conditions. In the same way the usefulness of a subroutine (or, in a language, a grammatical instruction) increases as the chance decreases, that it will be used incorrectly. From this point of view we should aim at a programming language consisting of a small number of concepts, the more general the better, the more systematic the better, in short: the more elegant the better src
we also look into language-dependent features, and language-independent features.
so we conclude on language as a material to embody a theory of semantico-spatial cognition
the aesthetics of code is the symbolic progression from word to structure to idea, with each of these configurations happening at different moments and different levels of expertise in programmers, and assigning different roles to the lexical tokens visible on the screen.
and then poetics