A Rhetorical Framework for Programming Language Evaluation
summary
Uses rhetoric and argument theory to give a practical way to justify subjective PL claims by tying specific language or tool features to observable effects. Defines categories 1–4 (formal, observational, programmer effects, aesthetic), shows the Cilk-5 example (Fibonacci snippet and similarity to C) as a reason-style justification, and argues for matching proofs, benchmarks, user studies or cognitive-work evidence like reasons→evidence rather than vague terms like “simple” or “elegant.”
AI-written summary · about
chapters (10)
- 0:00Intro
- 1:03We make a variety of different kinds of claims in research
- 2:29How can we guard against words shifting in mea confusing future/other audiences of our work?
- 3:39We distinguish four types of claims with different justifications, levels of subjectivity
- 6:04Natural language is socially- and historically-contingent.
- 7:49Language is dialogic and heteroglossic.
- 8:36Rhetorical analysis is a set of methods that describes how a text achieves effects on audiences.
- 11:33A claim of "simplicity" can be justified with a code snippet and/or comparisons to existing languages
- 13:55Evidence should support the idea that the reason lead to the claimed effects.
- 14:32Some existing research implicitly uses ideas fron psychology as evidence
related talks
49mWhat Counts as a Programming Language?
39mWhat Counts as a Programming Language
42mEvidence-Oriented Programming
57mWhy Programming Languages Matter
19mPanel: Compilation Frameworks
01h 07mInvited Talk - Guy Steele
46mWhat is PL Research?
43mParadigms Without Progress: Kuhnian Reflections on Programming Practice