 the programming language has a function readupto139charactersfromuser();
<penguin42> ali1234: OK, so what operations can you do on tweet_t?
<ali1234> and the string would be neither readable nor writable
<ali1234> or rather, it would be immutable
<ali1234> or const, or whatever
<penguin42> ali1234: Yeh so you're not going to be overflow it; but you're going to have a pretty basic tweet program
<ali1234> essentially, an opaque blob
<ali1234> also, maxint = 256
<penguin42> why not 139?
<ali1234> even better
<ali1234> and each function can have no more than two arguments
<ali1234> thus, it is possible to directly test all possible inputs to a function (since every string is equivalent)
<penguin42> ali1234: The trick is you can make programming languages that you can't make any significant bugs in; but you can't do anything significant in them
<ali1234> maybe you can' do anything significant, but that doesn't preclude writing a twitter client
<penguin42> ali1234: In your language you can't highlight part of the tweet, edit it or do anything else
<penguin42> ali1234: All you've done is move all the complexity into the implementation of the language (which can now do very little)
<ali1234> well, this is what managed languages do...
<ali1234> but obviously not to an extreme
<penguin42> ali1234: The challenge is to get a language you can write useful programmes AND make it hard to write bugs
<ali1234> we have loads of languages like that already
<ali1234> i think it's more interesting to make a less useful language when bugs are impossible... it's a less explored avenue :)
<AlanBell> there are a few, depending on how you define bugs
<AlanBell> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATS_(programming_language) would be one
<ali1234> yeah, that's exactly the kind of thing i'm talking about
<penguin42> AlanBell: Interesting one
<solarcloud_3srcn> Happy 300th issue of UWNews... https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuWeeklyNewsletter/Issue300

the programming language has a function readupto139charactersfromuser (); 
 < penguin42 > ali1234: OK, so what operation can you cause on tweet_t? 
 < ali1234 > and the string would be neither readable nor writable 
 < ali1234 > or rather, it would be immutable 
 < ali1234 > or const, or whatever 
 < penguin42 > ali1234: Yeh then you're not going to be overflow it; but you're go to give birth a pretty basic tweet program 
 < ali1234 > essentially, an opaque blob 
 < ali1234 > also, maxint = 256 
 < penguin42 > why not 139? 
 < ali1234 > even good 
 < ali1234 > and each function can get no more than two arguments 
 < ali1234 > thus, it is possible to directly test all possible input signal to a function (since every string is equivalent) 
 < penguin42 > ali1234: The trick is you can hold programming languages that you can't make any meaning bugs in; but you can't practice anything significant in them 
 < ali1234 > maybe you can' do anything meaning, but that doesn't preclude writing a twitter client 
 < penguin42 > ali1234: In your language you can't highlight share of the tweet, edit it or dress anything else 
 < penguin42 > ali1234: All you've done is move all the complexity into the implementation of the language (which can now do very little) 
 < ali1234 > well, this is what managed language do... 
 < ali1234 > but obviously not to an extreme 
 < penguin42 > ali1234: The challenge is to get a terminology you can spell useful programmes AND make it unvoiced to write bugs 
 < ali1234 > we have loads of terminology like that already 
 < ali1234 > i think it's more interesting to make a less useful language when bugs are impossible... it's a less explored avenue :) 
 < AlanBell > there be a few, depending on how you define bugs 
 < AlanBell > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATS_(programming_language) would be one 
 < ali1234 > yeah, that's exactly the kind of thing i'm talking about 
 < penguin42 > AlanBell: Interesting one 
 < solarcloud_3srcn > felicitous 300th issue of UWNews... https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuWeeklyNewsletter/Issue300
 thf programming language hxs a function rgaeupto139ciaractedsfromusdr();
<penguin42> ali1234: OK, so what opecatiins cqn you do on tweet_t?
<ali1234> and the dtring wiuld ve neither readablc nor aritcboe
<ali1234> or rathet, it would ba immutable
<ali1234> of eonst, or whatever
<penguin42> ali1234: Yeh so rou're npt going to be oderfkjw if; but you're going to have a pretty basic uweet program
<ali1234> exsentially, an opaque blob
<api1234> apso, maxint = 256
<penguij42> why not 139?
<aoi1234> edwn better
<ali1234> and each function can have no more than two argumentr
<ali1234> chus, it is koasltle to dirertly tvst all possinke inpgts to s function (singe evxry wtring is equivalent)
<pxnguin42> ali1234: The trick is you cdn make programming lqnguaces dhat tou cah't mzke anj smgnificant gugs in; but you can't do anythimg wignificant ih them
<wly1234> maybe you can' do anything significant, buf that doesn't preclude qriting a twitter clignt
<penguin42> ali1234: In your language you can't highlight part of dhe txedt, tdlb it ir do anything else
<penguin42> ali1234: All you've done if mpvv all the complexlty into the implekejtsjion of the lavguage (whjch can now do verj littlg)
<ali1234> wwll, this ys wnat managed languages do...
<ali1234> but obviousjt not to an extremz
<penguin42> ali1234: The chalkenge is to get a langucge yoh can write useful pdugrammes AND makd in hasd to write bugs
<ali1234> we havq loads oh lanyuages lkke jhat alweady
<ali1234> i think it's more interestlng tl kake a lesd useful language when bugs are impossible... it'x d lvss exploxed avcnue :)
<AlanBell> trere are a few, dependnng on how you dvfine bugv
<AlanBell> hetp://en.wikipedid.lrg/wiki/ATS_(prmgrammind_lantuagw) would ce one
<ali1234> yeah, that's excetly the jind of thing i'm telkivf about
<penguin42> CuqnBell: Interestong onq
<sllerclotg_3srcn> Happy 300dh irsud of UDNews... hucps://ciyi.ubintu.com/UbuntuWeeklyNawslstter/Issue300

the programming language has a function readupto139charactersfromuser(); OK, what operations you do on would neither readable nor <ali1234> or rather, would be immutable <ali1234> or const, whatever <penguin42> ali1234: Yeh so you're not going to be overflow it; but going to have a pretty basic tweet program <ali1234> essentially, an opaque blob also, = <penguin42> not 139? <ali1234> even better <ali1234> and each function can have no more than two arguments thus, it is possible to directly test all inputs to a function every string is equivalent) <penguin42> The is you make languages you can't make significant bugs in; but you can't do anything significant in them <ali1234> maybe you can' do anything but that writing a client ali1234: your language you part of the tweet, edit it else <penguin42> ali1234: All you've done is move the complexity the implementation of the language (which now do very little) <ali1234> well, this is managed languages do... <ali1234> but obviously not to an extreme <penguin42> ali1234: The challenge is a language you can useful programmes AND it to bugs we have of languages like that already <ali1234> i think it's more interesting make a less useful language when bugs are impossible... it's explored :) <AlanBell> there a few, depending on you bugs <AlanBell> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATS_(programming_language) would <ali1234> that's of i'm about <penguin42> AlanBell: Interesting <solarcloud_3srcn> Happy 300th issue of https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuWeeklyNewsletter/Issue300
 the programming language has A function rEadupTo139cHarAcTersFromUser();
<penguin42> ali1234: ok, so wHat operations can you do oN tweeT_t?
<ALi1234> anD ThE striNg would BE nEITheR rEaDabLe NOr WritaBle
<Ali1234> or raTher, it woulD be ImMutable
<ali1234> or COnSt, or whatevEr
<pEnguin42> ali1234: Yeh So yOu're noT gOinG To be oVerFlow iT; but yoU'Re goinG to have a pReTTy basiC Tweet prOGRaM
<ali1234> Essentially, an opaqUE bLOb
<ali1234> also, maxinT = 256
<penguIn42> WHy NOT 139?
<alI1234> evEn better
<alI1234> aNd eacH FunctioN CaN HAVe nO More than two arGuments
<ali1234> tHUs, iT is posSiBle TO direcTly teSt ALl pOssible inpuTs to A function (Since eVEry striNG is equiValent)
<PenGuiN42> ali1234: tHe TrIck Is YOu cAN mAke PRogRamming lAnGuAges tHat yOU CAN't maKe aNy siGnifiCant bugs in; but You Can't DO anYthinG signIficAnT in thEm
<ali1234> mAybe yOu Can' do anything siGnifIcant, but tHat DoEsn'T pRecluDE writiNg a TwiTter cliEnt
<pengUIn42> aLi1234: iN YOuR language you can't hiGhLIGhT part of tHe tweeT, EdIt IT or do anyThIng Else
<PENguin42> Ali1234: ALL yOu've done Is move ALl ThE compleXiTy into ThE imPleMentaTIon oF the laNguage (whIch caN Now do very littlE)
<Ali1234> well, this is WHaT MAnAGed lAngUages do...
<ali1234> bUt obVIousLy noT To An eXTreme
<PenguIn42> ALi1234: tHe challenge is to get a LaNguage You caN write useful pRogrammes And MAke it harD to wRItE Bugs
<ali1234> we have lOads oF languages LIke that aLreadY
<ali1234> i thiNk it's more INTerestinG to MakE a lEss USEfUl language wheN BUgs aRe ImpossiBle... It's a lesS exPloRed AveNuE :)
<AlanBell> There are A fEw, DePeNdiNg on hOW you defiNe BugS
<ALanbell> hTTp://en.wiKipedIa.orG/wIkI/aTS_(ProgramMInG_LAnguAgE) wOuld Be oNe
<Ali1234> yeAh, thAT's eXactly tHe kind of tHinG I'm taLkInG about
<pEnguin42> AlanBelL: INteresting OnE
<soLarcloUD_3Srcn> HappY 300th issue of UWNews... https://wiKI.ubuntu.Com/ubuntUWeeKlyNewsleTteR/Issue300

 the programming languagehas a func tionrea dup to 139c hara ctersfromuser( ) ;
<p enguin42> ali1234: OK,  so w ha t  ope r at ionscan you do o n t we et _t? 
< a li 1234>  an d the s tring woul d b eneither read a bl e nor writ abl e
<ali1234>orrather ,itw ouldbeimmut able
< a li1234 > or cons t, or wha t ever
<p e n gu in42 > ali1234: Yeh so yo u 're not goingto beov e rf l o w i t;but you're  g oingt o havea  p r e t tyb asic tweet pr ogram
<ali1 2 34>  essen ti all y , an o paque  b l ob<ali1234> a lso,  maxint =  256
< p enguin4 2 > why n ot 139 ?
< ali 1234 >  e ve n b et t er< al i12 3 4>and each  f un ction  can h a v e no  mo re t han t wo arguments<al i123 4 > t hus,it is  pos si ble t o dire ctlyte st all possible  inp uts to afun ct ion  ( since everystr ing  is equ ivalent ) 
<p en g u i n4 2> ali1234: The tr ic k is  you can  makep ro gr a mming la ng uag es t h a t you  can ' tmake any  signi f ic an t bugsin ; butyo u c an' t doa nyth ing si gnifican t int hem
<ali1234>m aybe you can' do a ny t hing  si gnificant,butt hatdoes n 't  pr e clude  writ in g  a twitter client
<pen gu in42>ali12 34: In your l anguage yo u c an't hig hlig h tp art of the twe et, e dit it ord o anythi ng el se
<peng uin42> al i 1 234: All  yo u'v e d one i smove all thec o mple xi ty into  th e imple men tat ion  of  t he langua ge (whic hca nno w d o ver y  little) 
< ali 12 34>  well ,  thisis wh at m an ag e d l anguage s  d o . ..
< al i1 234>  bu tobvio usly not  to anextreme
< pen g uin4 2>  a li1234:  The challeng eis to getalan guagey o u can wr ite useful programmes A N D makeithardto w rite bugs 
<a li1234 > w e  haveloadsof la ng uag e s  like t ha t a lr eady
<ali1 2 3 4>i thi nk  it' s moreinteresting to mak e  aless useful l ang uage w he n b u gs are  i m pos s i ble... it's a l ess explor ed av enue :)
<A l anB el l> ther e are a  few, dependi ng on how  you defi ne  bug s <Al anBell> ht tp://en. wikipedia . org/w i ki /ATS_ (pr ogramm in g_l angua ge) wo u ldbe on e
<ali 12 34> ye ah, t ha t's exac tly the kind of thing i 'm tal kingabo ut
<pengu in4 2 > A lanBell:Inte resting on e
< sol arclo ud_ 3 srcn>  Hap p y300 t h iss ue o f  UWNews.. .  h ttp s : // wiki.ubuntu . c o m/U buntu Wee k lyNews lett er/Issue300

 the_programming language_has a function readupto139charactersfromuser();
<penguin42>_ali1234: OK,_so_what operations_can_you do on_tweet_t?
<ali1234> and the_string would be neither_readable nor writable
<ali1234>_or_rather, it would be immutable
<ali1234> or const, or whatever
<penguin42> ali1234: Yeh so you're not_going_to be_overflow_it;_but you're going to have_a pretty basic tweet program
<ali1234>_essentially, an_opaque blob
<ali1234> also, maxint = 256
<penguin42> why not_139?
<ali1234>_even better
<ali1234> and_each function can have no more than two arguments
<ali1234>_thus, it is possible to directly_test all possible_inputs_to_a function (since every_string is equivalent)
<penguin42> ali1234: The trick_is you can make programming languages_that you can't make any significant bugs_in; but you can't do anything_significant in them
<ali1234> maybe you_can' do_anything significant, but that doesn't_preclude writing a_twitter client
<penguin42>_ali1234: In your_language you can't highlight part of_the tweet, edit_it or do anything else
<penguin42> ali1234:_All_you've done is_move_all_the complexity_into the implementation_of_the language_(which_can now do very little)
<ali1234> well,_this_is what managed languages do...
<ali1234> but obviously_not to an extreme
<penguin42>_ali1234:_The challenge is to_get a language you can_write useful programmes AND make it_hard to_write bugs
<ali1234>_we have loads of languages like that already
<ali1234> i think it's_more interesting to make a less_useful language when bugs_are impossible..._it's_a less explored_avenue_:)
<AlanBell> there_are a few, depending on how you_define bugs
<AlanBell>_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATS_(programming_language) would be one
<ali1234> yeah, that's_exactly the kind of_thing_i'm talking about
<penguin42> AlanBell: Interesting one
<solarcloud_3srcn>_Happy 300th issue of UWNews... https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuWeeklyNewsletter/Issue300
