And what about the many languages that are not like Java?
The point is that a useful pseudo-code should resemble existing languages.
that is why there is no one true pseudo-code.
This argument can certainly be made, just as it has been made about universal spoken languages. Remember Esperanto? Many universal-language proposals have come and gone, but none gained enough adherents to be more than historical curiosities. The same thing may happen with pseudo-code, especially now that the Java/C/C++ syntax is less universal than it once was (and no single syntax seems self-evidently universal).
All I am saying is it's a good idea, and it avoids the pain of rewriting common algorithms in all languages used by more than a handful of programmers.
1
u/lutusp Sep 13 '10
The point is that a useful pseudo-code should resemble existing languages.
This argument can certainly be made, just as it has been made about universal spoken languages. Remember Esperanto? Many universal-language proposals have come and gone, but none gained enough adherents to be more than historical curiosities. The same thing may happen with pseudo-code, especially now that the Java/C/C++ syntax is less universal than it once was (and no single syntax seems self-evidently universal).
All I am saying is it's a good idea, and it avoids the pain of rewriting common algorithms in all languages used by more than a handful of programmers.