Revision as of 13:01, 26 April 2016 (view source) Edmund (talk \| contribs) No edit summary ← Older edit		Revision as of 16:23, 26 April 2016 (view source) Edmund (talk \| contribs) mNo edit summary Newer edit →
Line 3: In my day job(s), a translator from Russian to English specializing in arts and technology-related material; also a philosopher / descriptive logician. My first book, <i>Towards a Science of Belief Systems</i>, was published by Palgrave Macmillan in 2014. My second is scheduled to appear in late 2016. Hobbyist programmer. I find programming to be a profoundly educational activity, and I think it's a shame more non-professionals don't do it—especially given how much wemany ~~tend~~of tous rely on computers. To encourage more people to learn, I've written a very short tutorial called <i>Programming Degree Zero</i>, to be used with a minimal computer that can be programmed in binary machine code from a simulated front panel in a browser window. If you're interested, check out the tutorial at http://www.edmundgriffiths.com/degreezero.html and the minimal computer at http://www.edmundgriffiths.com/czero.html. The implementation of the iterated prisoner's dilemma with AI opponent in 32 bytes of code and data is probably the one program I've ever written that I'm genuinely proud of. The programming languages I like the best tend to be ones that embody a clear model of computation and a clear aesthetic vision. (In Larry Wall's terms I am a doctrinaire 'modernist'). I enjoy the verbosity of COBOL, and the terseness of APL. In fact, I think I've liked every language I've ever seen that <i>didn't</i> obey normal operator precedence—because that's always a sign that a language is built according to some coherent principle. I also approve strongly of languages created for educational purposes and for non-specialists, such as BASIC and Logo.

Edmund

User:Edmund (view source)

Revision as of 16:23, 26 April 2016