[somewhereoutth]

Very nice!

However written languages convey not just what a program does, but also, through the names of things, what it means. Unfortunately there is no validation of (or other computation with) the meaning - so what it seems to mean may or may not have any bearing on what it actually means, either now or previously.

Thus a program is not just how humans talk to machines, but also (one of many ways) humans talk to humans.

[DennisP]

They do show some diagrams with comments.

It's true that there's no validation of comments. But there's also no validation that the name of a variable is what that variable actually means, or that the name of a function is what that function actually does.

[somewhereoutth]

Indeed - but with text programs you are forced to provide a name (hopefully a meaningful one!)

[jazzyjackson]

Honestly dithering over what to name something is the biggest timesuck, I wish I was unprincipled enough to just name them a,b,c... maybe use a drawing of a flow chart as the readme.md xD

  There are 2 hard problems in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-1 errors.