Re: data & code

"x" <x-false_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:40b5a87c_at_post.usenet.com...
> **** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****
>
>
> "mAsterdam" <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org> wrote in message
> news:40b51e92$0$37789$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl...
> > x wrote:
> > > Alfredo Novoa wrote:
> > >>Dawn M. Wolthuis wrote:
> > >>>I'm really curious what the huge distinction is (as
> > >>>in "totally different").
> > >>
> > >>They have nothing in common.
> > >>
> > >>>Much of the data that I see queried is derived.
> > >>
> > >>And code is a way to specify the derivation rules.
> > >>It has nothing to do with data.
> > >
> > > How do you call this:
> > > 31 c0 b9 10 00 40 01 c0 49 e3 fb
> >
> > I don't know what Alfredo would call it.
> > I'ld call it a meaningless string of characters.
> >
> > It looks somewhat like a part of hexdump,
> > and I might (if I were in another mood) even try
> > to ASCII or EBCDIC decode it under that assumption.
> > It might make sense in some language (probably english
> > or some programming language in this context).
> >
> > As it is, it is neither code nor data.
> >
> > glossary - code
> > glossary - data
> >
> > Some (e.g. prolog) don't care about the difference.
> > Some (e.g. NIAM/ORM) don't care about what they have in common.
> >
> > Does anybody dare to try to give some
> > reasonably acceptable descriptions?
>
> Citation from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_program
>
> Some speakers distinguish between data that describes a computer program
and
> data that does not describe a computer program; the former is called a
> "program", and the latter "data". However, this distinction between
> "program" and "data" is difficult to describe precisely, since all data
can
> be regarded as implementing a program, depending on how it is processed.

Very good. So, mountain man's "Organizational Intelligence" is the set of all data?
--dawn Received on Thu May 27 2004 - 12:19:57 CEST