Programming is a wide concept so i’ll go with the concepts i know.
Programming languages, proglang for short, are a set of rules to direct a computer. Any process of change of the proglang itself involves the developers fixing bugs that cause hardships to the proglang user, the contradiction here is between the passive prescence of bugs in the code of the proglang and the active developers fixing this bugs, secondarily theres is the development of new feature in the code.
The previous contradiction is the same as the one present between a programmer making functional code in a programming language
The programming ecosistem, considering that there are people involved and thus is part of material reality, would have contradictions related to class contradictions
I wouldn’t say proglangs are rules. Rather, they are a language of instructions to the machine; the language can often be converted to machine instructions through a tool (often a compiler).
Class contradictions of course have an impact.
I think the UNIX philosophy hold some communist values:
A communal interface for programs and scripts should exist to reduce redundant code.
Programs should not have private property (or internal code) when unneccessary.
I think that the “Test prototypes often” is a result idea from the cold war era. Heavy testing was neccessary to ensure that programs functioned properly.
The UNIX philosophy was born in an environment with a lack of surplus; likewise, the primal environment neccessitated communism in humans due to the lack of surplus.
Also, it’s interesting that computers could technically be described in DiaMat.
Voltage changes form a principal contradiction between states. (Typically a binary state.)
Electrical circuits form base contradictions in some way.
These two ‘principal’ contradiction form the base for a higher-level contradiction:
A contradiction between the setter/retriever (CPU) and Memory.
Programming is a wide concept so i’ll go with the concepts i know.
Programming languages, proglang for short, are a set of rules to direct a computer. Any process of change of the proglang itself involves the developers fixing bugs that cause hardships to the proglang user, the contradiction here is between the passive prescence of bugs in the code of the proglang and the active developers fixing this bugs, secondarily theres is the development of new feature in the code.
The previous contradiction is the same as the one present between a programmer making functional code in a programming language
The programming ecosistem, considering that there are people involved and thus is part of material reality, would have contradictions related to class contradictions
Im open to corrections
I wouldn’t say proglangs are rules. Rather, they are a language of instructions to the machine; the language can often be converted to machine instructions through a tool (often a compiler).
Class contradictions of course have an impact.
I think the UNIX philosophy hold some communist values:
The UNIX philosophy was born in an environment with a lack of surplus; likewise, the primal environment neccessitated communism in humans due to the lack of surplus.
Also, it’s interesting that computers could technically be described in DiaMat.
These two ‘principal’ contradiction form the base for a higher-level contradiction: