On 8/14/2010 11:26 AM, K1TTT wrote:


only if the thesis didn't care about the exact implementation, but did
depend on the algorithm. if the code were just a tool used to crunch
data, which is what it sounded like in that part of the discussion,
then the code itself may not even be part of the thesis, just the
results of crunching.

I gotta go, the "ring of idiots" grows ... you are new addition? I
don't remember you from years ago, like I do richard ... but makes no
difference ... anything code-able in a language is code-able in pseudo
.... indeed, things impossible to code in a real language are possible in
pseudo ... any software engineer can validate that ... ROFLOL

Regards,
JS

On Aug 15, 4:36*am, John Smith wrote:
On 8/14/2010 11:26 AM, K1TTT wrote:



only if the thesis didn't care about the exact implementation, but did
depend on the algorithm. *if the code were just a tool used to crunch
data, which is what it sounded like in that part of the discussion,
then the code itself may not even be part of the thesis, just the
results of crunching.

I gotta go, the "ring of idiots" grows ... you are new addition? *I
don't remember you from years ago, like I do richard ... but makes no
difference ... anything code-able in a language is code-able in pseudo
... indeed, things impossible to code in a real language are possible in
pseudo ... any software engineer can validate that ... ROFLOL

Regards,
JS

if you can't code it in a 'real' language how would you code it in a
pseudo code? that just doesn't make sense. the whole purpose of
pseudo code is to help work out logic and program structure at a high
level. it wouldn't be much good if you couldn't break it down into
actual code in the end.

On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 03:53:05 -0700 (PDT), K1TTT
wrote:


if you can't code it in a 'real' language how would you code it in a
pseudo code? that just doesn't make sense.
Agreed.

the whole purpose of
pseudo code is to help work out logic and program structure at a high
level.
Your interpretation of pseudo code seems much broader than mine. I
view pseudo code as a non-verbal means to describe the nuts and bolts
of an implementation. I don't see pseudo code having the ability to
describe design patterns, even basic procedural patterns such as
inheritance, polymorphism and encapsulation. Pseudo code just isn't
abstract enough and doesn't scale well enough to communicate larger,
more general concepts, principles and ideas.

A design pattern might call for a collection of references to objects
where pseudo code would use an array of pointers. Abstractly they are
the same but while a pointer is a reference, a reference per se does
not have to describe an object's location in memory. A reference could
be something as simple as an index into an array. It's a subtle
difference but most meaningful. In this example the design pattern can
be implemented in C# while the pseudo code presents a stumbling block.

Then again at certain levels of abstraction, design patterns might be
described as being pseudo code. Design patterns are very useful in
revealing what public properties and methods types will require
without drilling down to implementation specifics.

it wouldn't be much good if you couldn't break it down into
actual code in the end.

Design patterns can do this nicely for OO languages. I can't speak for
FORTRAN as I haven't had occasion to use that language in almost forty
years. Still it seems a FORTRAN flow chart would fall somewhere
between design patterns and pseudo code. A flow chart does describe a
specific design without specifying implementation details.

On Aug 15, 2:34*pm, Registered User wrote:
On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 03:53:05 -0700 (PDT), K1TTT
wrote:



if you can't code it in a 'real' language how would you code it in a
pseudo code? *that just doesn't make sense.

Agreed.

the whole purpose of
pseudo code is to help work out logic and program structure at a high
level. *

Your interpretation of pseudo code seems much broader than mine. I
view pseudo code as a non-verbal means to describe the nuts and bolts
of an implementation. I don't see pseudo code having the ability to
describe design patterns, even basic procedural patterns such as
inheritance, polymorphism and encapsulation. Pseudo code just isn't
abstract enough and doesn't scale well enough to communicate larger,
more general concepts, principles and ideas.

A design pattern might call for a collection of references to objects
where pseudo code would use an array of pointers. Abstractly they are
the same but while a pointer is a reference, a reference per se does
not have to describe an object's location in memory. A reference could
be something as simple as an index into an array. It's a subtle
difference but most meaningful. In this example the design pattern can
be implemented in C# while the pseudo code presents a stumbling block.

Then again at certain levels of abstraction, design patterns might be
described as being pseudo code. Design patterns are very useful in
revealing what public properties and methods types will require
without drilling down to implementation specifics.

it wouldn't be much good if you couldn't break it down into
actual code in the end.

Design patterns can do this nicely for OO languages. I can't speak for
FORTRAN as I haven't had occasion to use that language in almost forty
years. Still it seems a FORTRAN flow chart would fall somewhere
between design patterns and pseudo code. A flow chart does describe a
specific design without specifying implementation details.

there is OO fortran also!

K1TTT wrote:

if you can't code it in a 'real' language how would you code it in a
pseudo code? that just doesn't make sense. the whole purpose of
pseudo code is to help work out logic and program structure at a high
level. it wouldn't be much good if you couldn't break it down into
actual code in the end.

David, just count your blessings that "John" has you on his "ring of
idiots" list. It's actually an honor.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On Aug 17, 7:23*pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
K1TTT wrote:
if you can't code it in a 'real' language how would you code it in a
pseudo code? *that just doesn't make sense. *the whole purpose of
pseudo code is to help work out logic and program structure at a high
level. *it wouldn't be much good if you couldn't break it down into
actual code in the end.

David, just count your blessings that "John" has you on his "ring of
idiots" list. It's actually an honor.

* * * * - 73 de Mike N3LI -

yeah, i was just trying to see how fast i could get him to call me
names. didn't take too long.