PDA

View Full Version : Where will programming be in 30 years ?



mrpickle
01-03-2004, 08:25 AM
Hello,

I was just wondering where you all feel programming will be in the next 30 years or at any point in the future.

Could everything be OO or perhaps a new concept? I wonder if C will still be used in 30 years, im sure it will however im sure there will be alot of new Languages created by then.

I know its impossible to speculate accurately because its not happened yet but based on your experiences where do you think it will be?

MrPickle.

afreedboy
01-03-2004, 08:36 AM
:confused:

I am not astrologer, so I don't know.

But I am also quite sure there will be many new languages.
And I hope M$ is still the king of computer world. :rolleyes:

1veedo
01-03-2004, 08:46 AM
Maby C##+ :D And Java#. VisualBasic++ GameQBasic (for the lamers of the programming world)

-=SoKrA=-
01-03-2004, 08:58 AM
>>GameQBasic (for the lamers of the programming world)
lol
The're will probably be many new languages, programs will be absolutely bloated, using unnecessary memory, Windos (if it still exist) will need at least a GB of RAM to run, Linux will be recognized as being superior (sorry bludstayne) and will have as much games support as Win has now.

joshdick
01-03-2004, 09:12 AM
I hope in the future that we will have languages of a next generation that add another layer of abstraction.

Here's an article on The Hundred-Year Language (http://www.paulgraham.com/hundred.html).

Jeremy G
01-03-2004, 10:05 AM
c+=5

VirtualAce
01-03-2004, 10:18 AM
I'm just the opposite joshdick, I hope that code does not become more abstract. Abstraction usually results in over-bloated
code.

Prelude
01-03-2004, 11:00 AM
>Abstraction usually results in over-bloated
code.
Just enough abstraction is a good thing, but too much is bad. Unfortunately, most modern languages encourage too much.

EvBladeRunnervE
01-03-2004, 02:11 PM
Well lets see, we have gone from (if we are considering 2nd gen languages and higher, not assembly), FORTRAN and COBOL, and less than a kilobyte of ram, all the way to VB and JAVA and multiple gigs of ram. I dont like the way languages are progressing, as they tend now to cater to the lowest common denominator and are as bloated as that 800 lb woman. How is it that we have progressed from 64k being all that we would ever need to gigabytes not being enough?

and in 30 years, I see thousands of new languages coming and going, just like it has been these last 30 years.

SMurf
01-03-2004, 03:59 PM
However, in the grand scale of things, arguably the thing everyone's supposed to be working towards in terms of programming languages is natural language programming. You tell the computer what to do, in your native tongue, and it does it.

That's gonna require tons of abstraction and God knows what else to achieve, not to mention gigs of memory. Unfortunately it would then give rise to the phrase "script foetus"... :p

nickname_changed
01-04-2004, 01:49 AM
Originally posted by SMurf
You tell the computer what to do, in your native tongue, and it does it.

But then we'll be out of a job :(

civix
01-04-2004, 02:37 AM
Originally posted by stovellp
But then we'll be out of a job :(

No, we'll be the people that flash the hardware with the program that allows it to perform the speech recognition. I think. Or maybe we'll write that program.

I think that there will always be some sort of programming, for as long as computers are around. :)

Silvercord
01-04-2004, 02:42 AM
Hopefully in 30 years we'll have a serious attempt at intelligent artificial intelligence, and the art of determining the correct instructions to issue to a processing unit will be performed by another processing unit. At least I hope it's headed at least close to that direction.

doubleanti
01-04-2004, 12:48 PM
>I think that there will always be some sort of programming, for as long as computers are around.

Hm, y'know it always seems to be a bit arbitrary the standpoint of organizing a processor around a set of instructions performed in binary voltage levels, conveninent as it is and as deep it runs in the infrastructure right now. Why choose such? They never tell you these sort of things in the coursework... Many functions could be performed using, instead, a discrete set of four values or so much better, yes? ie using an op-amp to add two or more voltage levels each having perhaps 4 or 16 or 256 discrete voltage levels, and with such an accurately ideal op-amp I believe it would be acceptable. Why is this not?

Salem
01-04-2004, 12:56 PM
> Unfortunately it would then give rise to the phrase "script foetus"
I suppose in 30 years, the old fogeys on this board could be crypt kiddies

VirtualAce
01-04-2004, 01:24 PM
Hopefully in 30 years we'll have a serious attempt at intelligent artificial intelligence, and the art of determining the correct instructions to issue to a processing unit will be performed by another processing unit. At least I hope it's headed at least close to that direction.


I hope not. Haven't you ever seen the Terminator?


:D

BMJ
01-04-2004, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by dbgt goten
c+=5 lol :D ::thumbs up::

Silvercord
01-04-2004, 01:35 PM
I hope not. Haven't you ever seen the Terminator?

No what is it

VirtualAce
01-04-2004, 01:36 PM
You gotta be kidding me.

Right?


:confused:

SirCrono6
01-04-2004, 03:43 PM
This is how it will work:

C -> C+ | C++ -> C+++ | C# -> C## | Java -> Gava | ASM -> ASML (Assembly-Line language :D) | COBOL Fortran -> CoTran | XML HTML DHTML -> DHXTML | CoTran DHXTML -> CoTrMHXML |
C+ C+++ C## -> C+*# | C+*# Gava CoTrMHXML -> GaCoTrC+*MLXH# | GaCoTrC+*MLXH# ASML -> GaCoTrC+*MLXH#ASM | GaCoTrC+*MLXH#ASM - > God's Language

- SirCrono6

P.S. >GaCoTrC+*MLXH#ASM< God, who would program in that?

littleweseth
01-06-2004, 03:44 PM
can you imagine the instructions? arrgh!


<main ( 1024bit_int argArg, trigger onMouseOver() );>
<functioncall> SomeFunction(); </functioncall>
</main>

linuxdude
01-06-2004, 10:09 PM
::code in 30 years::


computer, I want you to work.

I get a compiler error it says syntax error. Did I forget a comma or something? Plz I need it for homework:)


(C board member) Reply: You forgot to capitalize the C.

(11 year old futuristic begginer) Reply: Oh I always forget that thanx.

Just think the people on this board would be gods in coding for a language that simple. I'd be smart and all my code would work:)

Kinasz
01-07-2004, 06:15 AM
[QUOTE Many functions could be performed using, instead, a discrete set of four values or so much better, yes? ie using an op-amp to add two or more voltage levels each having perhaps 4 or 16 or 256 discrete voltage levels, and with such an accurately ideal op-amp I believe it would be acceptable. Why is this not?[/QUOTE]

Hell why dont we just resurect the analog computer? That worked well... didnt it?
:confused:

What about quantum computers, no one hass mentioned programming them if they ever exist. Someone will need to do it if we are going to fight skynet and have a chance.

doubleanti
01-07-2004, 02:06 PM
>Hell why dont we just resurect the analog computer? That worked well... didnt it?

The concept behind digital technology is that analog values are rectified into a set of discrete states, in our case a binary system. I am just wondering why it was not quantized to a four-valued or 8-valued system instead. You misaddressed my suggestion, sorry to be unclear.

bludstayne
01-07-2004, 06:14 PM
Linux will be recognized as being superior (sorry bludstayne)
That's alright. You never know, FreeBSD may just die in the next 30 years. So may Linux. I'm not the type that follows their "software religion" where people don't switch software just because they're used to one software, even though the other is superior.

I see the death of M$, at least in the OS world. They may still make other stuffs. They just wouldn't be as large a company, and Billy-bob would still consider them the leader of technology :rolleyes:

afreedboy
01-07-2004, 11:49 PM
Originally posted by bludstayne
I see the death of M$, at least in the OS world. They may still make other stuffs. They just wouldn't be as large a company, and Billy-bob would still consider them the leader of technology :rolleyes:


From my point of view, M$ may die in other stuff, but for OS world, they can't die until we all go to Mars :D :rolleyes: :cool:

Shogun
01-08-2004, 05:33 AM
MS will be dead and burried in 30 years, everyone will use some form of a UNIX OS and ther'ell probably be a few new langunges which will be even better then the onces we have today.

nickname_changed
01-08-2004, 05:42 AM
Actually, I think Microsoft will still be around. Maybe may not be as dominant, but I don't think they will go away for good.

Personally, I like Microsoft products, and I even chose Microsoft products over Opensource ones, IF they are better (OpenOffice.org is great and all, but I'll stick to MS Office).

Hopefully, with the rise of Linux and UNIX onto the desktop, Microsoft will lower its prices substantially. I don't want to see Linux take over the desktop, but hopefully by adding some form of competition Microsoft will lower its prices for the consumer. Thats the change I'm hoping for in 30 years.