What language is your religion

Readability

What language is your religion

From the Curt Jester here is a rather funny list of what pro­gram­ming lan­guage is your reli­gion:

C would be Judaism — it’s old and restric­tive, but most of the world is famil­iar with its laws and respects them. The catch is, you can’t con­vert into it — you’re either into it from the start, or you will think that it’s insan­ity. Also, when things go wrong, many peo­ple are will­ing to blame the prob­lems of the world on it.

C++ would be Islam — It takes C and not only keeps all its laws, but adds a very com­plex new set of laws on top of it. It’s so ver­sa­tile that it can be used to be the foun­da­tion of any­thing, from great atroc­i­ties to beau­ti­ful works of art. Its fol­low­ers are con­vinced that it is the ulti­mate uni­ver­sal lan­guage, and may be angered by those who dis­agree. Also, if you insult it or its founder, you’ll prob­a­bly be threat­ened with death by more rad­i­cal followers.

For some rea­son the Catholic Church is not included and he thinks about it.

Now a pro­gram­ming lan­guage that reflected the Catholic Church would be a cross between Basic and machine lan­guage. Basic gives it the James Joyce ‘here comes every­body’ aspect and machine lan­guage would give it the direct access to God that we have through the Eucharist. The Catholic Church can nour­ish any­body from the hum­blest peas­ant to the most bril­liant the­olo­gian. Like most lan­guages an inter­preter is required for com­piled code. In com­put­ing if you don’t have a valid interpreter/​compiler the code you write will end up either doing noth­ing or not what you intended. The teach­ing mag­is­terium of the Church gives us that inter­preter in real life. A good interpreter/​compiler also has lots of error check­ing. On our own we are often prone to errors and so being informed of our errors is to our good to ensure that we write valid code. Often we think we are writ­ing valid code only to find that when we go to build it some­thing is not exactly right. You can’t just tell the interpreter/​compiler you are sorry for writ­ing bad code, you have to repent of your cod­ing error and fix it.

He goes on quite a bit on it. I would lean toward machine code myself but that’s me.

From the Curt Jester here is a rather funny list of what programming language is your religion:

C would be Judaism – it’s old and restrictive, but most of the world is familiar with its laws and respects them. The catch is, you can’t convert into it – you’re either into it from the start, or you will think that it’s insanity. Also, when things go wrong, many people are willing to blame the problems of the world on it.

C++ would be Islam – It takes C and not only keeps all its laws, but adds a very complex new set of laws on top of it. It’s so versatile that it can be used to be the foundation of anything, from great atrocities to beautiful works of art. Its followers are convinced that it is the ultimate universal language, and may be angered by those who disagree. Also, if you insult it or its founder, you’ll probably be threatened with death by more radical followers.

For some reason the Catholic Church is not included and he thinks about it.

Now a programming language that reflected the Catholic Church would be a cross between Basic and machine language. Basic gives it the James Joyce ‘here comes everybody’ aspect and machine language would give it the direct access to God that we have through the Eucharist. The Catholic Church can nourish anybody from the humblest peasant to the most brilliant theologian. Like most languages an interpreter is required for compiled code. In computing if you don’t have a valid interpreter/compiler the code you write will end up either doing nothing or not what you intended. The teaching magisterium of the Church gives us that interpreter in real life. A good interpreter/compiler also has lots of error checking. On our own we are often prone to errors and so being informed of our errors is to our good to ensure that we write valid code. Often we think we are writing valid code only to find that when we go to build it something is not exactly right. You can’t just tell the interpreter/compiler you are sorry for writing bad code, you have to repent of your coding error and fix it.

He goes on quite a bit on it. I would lean toward machine code myself but that’s me.