|
|
|
|
|
|
by xyzzy_plugh
2873 days ago
|
|
|
The problem with this angle is that while sure, you can always make a compiler more intelligent in ambiguous situations, you must also now train all the humans interfacing with it to be equally as intelligent (or at least, able to sufficiently disambiguate). We don't see many context-sensitive grammars for programming languages, not because very difficult to implement, but I suspect because they're hard for humans to understand. There is something to be said for the simplicity of naming things to describe what they are (e.g. Hungarian notation), but I really think it's a mistake for languages (configuration, programming, etc.) to even allow identifiers to be reused for differing types. |
|
|
I'm not sure what you mean here; probably I'm misunderstanding you somehow.
If you make the compiler more intelligent so that it can tell the humans about subtle problems, that lets the humans be less intelligent (or at least have to think less). No?