Talk:Computer program

message: I'm moving the newly added "program execution" and the top image to this talk section.
The "program execution" template is too large and negatively affects the article's format. The top image has interesting information, but too much of it. Also, the image should be split in two. There are two concepts present, and the joining of them is unclear. Timhowardriley (talk) 07:31, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Timhowardriley The distinction between "Program", "Process" and "Thread" and the steps that a line of "instruction code of program" is delivered to a CPU for processing is important. So in my opinion the image can be restored. That is, the image says "What happens that a CPU processes a program?". Thanks, Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 11:01, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This edit to move the image to the OS section was a good idea. Timhowardriley (talk) 22:10, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved "program execution" template and top image to talk. 

message: This edit changed the Prolog section from material I could understand to material I cannot understand. This article is general purpose. It should explain computer programs at the most elementary level possible. The prior Prolog material was elementary. The current material is complicated. Was the prior material incorrect? Timhowardriley (talk) 20:22, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, unfortunately, the previous program was not correct. See the talk page for declarative programming. For example, the clauses cat(tom).  animal(cat).are not correct Prolog. Robert Kowalski (talk) 21:24, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prolog rewrite 

message: The comprehensive example uses the word "clause" twice: "third clause" and "fourth clause". What are the first two clauses? Perhaps the clauses could be labeled in comments. Timhowardriley (talk) 12:33, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. Thanks. Robert Kowalski (talk) 15:02, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prolog example use of word "clause" 

message: @Robert Kowalski Rule 4) seems to define a superclass, not a subclass:
A thing is a creature if the thing is a dragon:
is_a_creature(X) :-
    is_a_dragon(X).
Combining Rule 2) to Rule 4) constrains a creature to be a dragon if one parent is a dragon. I'm trying to wrap my head around the possibility of introducing a monster to the mix. A monster is a creature that doesn't billow fire.
is_a_monster(X) :-
    is_a_creature(X),
    not billows_fire(X).
Yet, the new rule would seem to contradict rule 4), unless rule 4) defines a superclass. Timhowardriley (talk) 00:54, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prolog rule 4 a subclass or superclass? 

message: I just removed the image from the lead sentence of this article as I think it is quite uninformative. It's a stock-photo-like photo of HTML and JavaScript on a website, which, while it could be considered a computer programme, is hardly a prime example thereof. The formatting is also clearly for aesthetic rather than functional reasons, making it rather misrepresentative of how code actually looks. Now I'd like to discuss what if anything we should use to illustrate this article. I personally would probably prefer some kind of schematic representation, but I don't know if we have any good ones – one was removed above for being too complicated. Another option could be to include an  with some actual code, like to the right. We could include multiple languages to illustrate different paradigms. However, this may be going too much into the territory of programming languages, rather than the abstract conept of a computer programme. Any ideas? -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 17:10, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: True, the prior image worked as eye-candy (aesthetic reason). Perhaps this JavaScript eye-candy shows more function: . Otherwise, the above image-frame works -- without the word "influential" in the caption. Maybe an image-frame of a JavaScript snippet is a good compromise. Timhowardriley (talk) 20:23, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I wanted to try out the image frame thing because I assume it's better for accessibility and semantic Web, but I also realize an image can have certain advantages. I'd still like to explore the possibility of some simple conceptual illustration, but I'm not sure I'm the best qualified to say how one should illustrate this concept. Something I think we also should consider, is that most readers will not be interacting with programmes in source code form; that is not to say that a user interface is the best choice of image either, but maybe that speaks for a more conceptual illustration as well? -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 19:13, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illustration