Week 5

Computer code is a language and “programming language” is not an oxymoron. Essentially languages exist to communicate and coding does that. The difference that makes computer code different from other language is that it is not meant to communicate to other humans, it is meant to communicate with computers. There are exceptions to this of course, for examples the //comments in code are not meant for computers, in fact they are especially meant not to be interpreted by the computer. Another thing that separates code from normal language is interpretation. The interpretation of computer code is a science in its own right that involves a complex interplay of translation, contextualization, and compilation. Often this process is so complicated that the code that the machine executes is nothing like what is written. In this instance one can think of the code not as communicating an idea, but rather describing it. I think this sentiment is present in “ What is Codework?”. The piece states that codework is parasitic. Take for instance a code that draws a picture. Perhaps the picture is something people can agree is art, but if the code is a description, is it art. Is a description of art always art in itself? Perhaps this is how code can be parasitic, if the product of code is artistic then perhaps the codework that describes the product can vampirically lay claim to the aspect of art. Of course, not all code is codework, “To code is not to produce codework; it is to produce code on the level of the code or interface. Bridged code, embedded code, is not codework; the irreversible spew of cellular automata is codework”.