Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="spinoza1111, post: 4051194"] You are misunderstanding something. Sure, nothing's "irreducible" since any unstructured program can be automatically structured (that results from Turing equivalence). But as I indicate elsethread, Dijkstra, like Confucius, was looking for the type of person who would prefer not to be unstructured even as Confucius looked for the gentleman, and would grow out of wanting to fall through, as I did in 1972 at the ripe age of 22. His "elegance" was a moral category which recognized that the ultimate source of value is the Other Person, Levinas, "the other whose face is the face of God removed from the world", the other who people so readily call a "troll" (where becoming familiar with the particular other's personality and actual skills and lack of decency towards others, and calling him a fraudulent motherfucker, is quite different). Because for Dijkstra people and their human culture is infinitely more important that machines or software, programming is the moral act of documenting precisely your intentions as to use a computer to an Other. Anyone who would prefer to be cute and write a fallthrough case because he think's its cute and shows that he should be writing OS code and not scripts is a cad on this account, and because, as TW Adorno showed, "intelligence is a moral category", a stupid cad. Oh we must be "objective". I'm afraid that Adorno showed that being "objective" for low level people in an administered world, which is what we are, which is what you are, is to be blinded as were Odysseus' men to most of reality. The code is ill-structured, dear heart. [/QUOTE]

Verification