EYG: A Programming Language for Humans

(crowdhailer.me)

19 points | by crowdhailer 1 hour ago

4 comments

  • invalidOrTaken 30 minutes ago
    Interesting stuff. I do like the taxonomy of "computer work", where it's one part logic cognition, and one part ticky-tack details.
  • desireco42 13 minutes ago
    Ha, very interesting. I just started using Gleam last week or so... I knew about it and loved Elm back in the day.

    Anyhow, will enjoy discovering EYG as well.

  • prologic 47 minutes ago
    Functional programming paradigms? Matching? Complex syntax? Sorry but either I've missed the point, or you've lost me. If we're trying to create tools for non-Developers to build software, this isn't it. You can pretty much already just ask Claude/Codex/whatever and it'll build you a thing™ and it'll probably work. You don't even need to read the code.
    • sodapopcan 30 minutes ago
      I have to admit, it's kinda nice to read a comment that's simply complaining about programming language design again. For a second I thought there wasn't even going to be mention of AI, but alas...
    • pasquinelli 22 minutes ago
      from the article

      > My hypothesis

      > Developers deal with two broad categories of work.

      > - Describing the logic of the problem they are solving using language constructs like if, loop, var etc. > - Working with computers to run those problems using constucts like $PATH, /var/tmp and AWS.

      > There are a lot of humans who can do the first work fine but don’t have the time to master the second category. I call these humans “makers”.

      the idea seems to be to make an end-user programming language for makers. makers want to make not ask ai to make, and they are capable of writing code, actually, it's just all the computer plumbing that's too much of a pain.

      a sophisticated programming language to write personal software that cuts out the computer plumbing would be something i'd love. i'm not fully clear how that would be done, but i like the thought.

    • zem 29 minutes ago
      I would say that if you get the syntax and docs right functional programming paradigms and matching can be very intuitive for non programmers. you don't have to build up a mental model of variables versus objects and passing by value or reference.
  • z0ltan 16 minutes ago
    [dead]