From Utexas · · 1m
EWD 667: Natural Language Programming Fools
E.W. Dijkstra argues natural language programming is a fool's errand, not a solution to coding errors.
In brief
E.W. Dijkstra argues natural language programming is a fool's errand, not a solution to coding errors. E.W. Dijkstra warns natural language programming won't fix coding errors and could worsen them. Originally reported by Utexas.
Early computing criticism
Early programmers felt formal symbols were too strict for coding tasks.
“But a moment is a long time, and thought is a painful process.”
High-level languages emerged
High-level programming languages improved error detection but still required precise syntax.
Natural language programming idea
Some proposed machines should understand human language to reduce coding errors.
Why natural language fails
Natural language interfaces increase work for both humans and machines without simplifying tasks.
History of math shows problem
Math history shows verbal approaches led to dead ends without formal symbols.
Formal symbols are better
Formal symbols let machines avoid nonsense that natural language can't easily catch.
Natural language programming risks
Natural language programming could take millennia to fix without formal symbols.
New illiteracy problem
Declining language skills threaten natural language programming's viability.
The takeaway
E.W. Dijkstra warns natural language programming won't fix coding errors and could worsen them.
