>How many English constructs do you have in a programming language? Func, var, for, if, else, import, etc.
Func and var aren't even English words. Even an English speaker would have to at least get confirmation that their guess is right. You could replace them with arbitrary symbols and it wouldn't rally really change anything.
Not for those who professionally speak Mathematics; which is the audience APL was made to serve, after all.
Amusing so many programmers will complain how they feel horribly excluded by APL, but see no issue with every other programming language in existence speaking exclusively ASCII English. At least Math is a true lingua franca, unlike our awful Saxon bodge. I know which I'd be safer speaking when Aliens come to visit. https://youtu.be/t2TDf9XU09k?t=120
But math is also very difficult to understand. The information density on all of the symbols is too high and it's easy to misunderstand (or not understand) as a result. I've met very few people who were comfortable with reading math, even fairly simple things that they otherwise understand.
Sure it is, if you’re not a professional mathematician. For those who are, it is a fabulously precise concise system of communication. The same can be said for “legalese”, “medicalese”, or any other specialist language that provides its specialist users with unrivaled efficiency and power of expression.
Whereas laypeople require lay language; which is why the best communicators are fluent in both, able to communicate complex ideas to both peers and public at a level and in a language that fits each audience.
That so many programmers resist – even belittle – attempts to understand and close the accessibility gap in their own constructed languages speaks volumes of what piss-awful communicators they really are; and how – rather than break that shortcoming down and work to improve it – they weaponize it to keep all those who are not like them out and so maintain their exclusive control at the expense of everyone else.
..
Remember, the point of software is not to encapsulate programming knowledge, it is to encapsulate business (or other expert domain) knowledge. That is where the program’s actual value is, and all that classes and types and conditionals and loops and whatnot crap is just a lot of bureaucratic bullshit that must be waded through when encoding that expert knowledge in unspecialized languages of poor expressive power.
Making programming languages accessible and useful to users operating in other domains will take far more than just some l10n sugar. Still, anything that can improve access for the 5Bn humans who don’t speak English, never mind “ASCIInerdese”, is a positive move.
Func and var aren't even English words. Even an English speaker would have to at least get confirmation that their guess is right. You could replace them with arbitrary symbols and it wouldn't rally really change anything.