We are doing applied CS here, don't we? So lets express us in that language. Also, why do we accept a*2 then? This is short mathematical notation, also a specialized language.
Every field evolves domain languages for a reason: it adds the benefit of naming actions instead of implicitly doing them.
"Being close to natural language" is a red herring. You can try, you will never get there and you will loose any benefit of a domain language.
Also, my point was that interpretations of expressiveness differ vastly, so we should stop claiming that something is more expressive then the other.
Yes. And CoffeScript prefers comprehensions over the maps. From the docs:
> Comprehensions should be able to handle most places
> where you otherwise would use a loop, each/forEach,
> map, or select/filter
In this case I prefer that way also because it puts the main thing first.
"In computer science, the expressive power of a language describes the ideas expressible in that language."
So, language expressiveness is about what can be expressed in a language, and not really about whether you type "multiply number by 2 for every number in 1 to 10" or use map, since that expresses the same thing.
"In computer science". I'm referring to expressiveness from a linguistics point of view - understanding an expression without depending on complex previously learned concepts.
Also, I'm not a native English speaker so I might be using the wrong words to express myself.
I fail see how map is a difficult concept, despite being a word that needs to be learned. I do a lot of training for Ruby and usually introduce enumerable.rb first to all newbies. Usual reaction: "cool, I finally have a word for that". It gives programmers the ability to _express_ what action they are doing there, instead of leaving them free-floating in a for-loop-soup.
For example, ask your parents about map, then the comprehension, which one will they be able to understand?
It's about usability: the most ingenious programmer will be more efficient using a simpler, straight-forward interface as long as it accomplishes the task. You're a user of a language's interface/syntax.
But we are drifting off here. I'll avoid using "expressive" the next time around :)
Since when is that the standard for a programming language? Some tools are made for expert usage -- they require training and foreknowledge. Programming languages weren't made for your mom.
The funny part is that your parents probably wont understand the comprehension either. Even if they were likely to, I prefer to leave things the way they are when the only reason to change it is "now my kid brother can do it!"
Actually, both of my parents are programmers of the old school, so they even understand the difference between foldr and foldl.
I am actually in favor of having both options, so we might be on the same page actually. What I am opposed to, is the notion of adding a positive label to the less specialized version and a negative to the other.
map is an easy and powerful concept, but a comprehension resembles natural language better. I agree though that map is more _expressive_ (a more concise and comprehensive way of communicating).
The conditional could be placed outside the string and still be a one-liner. It's there mostly for "flow".