I generally line up with this. Syntactic confusion is a huge barrier to "thinking" in a new computing language, now add to it by having to "think in new concepts" which lies in the semantics.
Its a kind of combinatorial explosion of meaning and power of ideas.
The expressive qualities of lambda notations can die in the inherent confusion "am I parsing this sentence-in-lambda left-to-right or right-to-left" -And I really do mean parse, the internal brain-model of "reading the words and symbols" informs how people construct a mental model of what they see.
yes a <- b and b -> a could both mean B is transformed into A but one of them is actually "read" as "a is derived from b" which is different, syntactically, and in comprehension terms
(I don't mean any computing language does this specific notation. I just mean, that how we comprehend this is subtly different, and in the case of first/new programming language, its a higher-order problem. New concepts, new notation)
Its a kind of combinatorial explosion of meaning and power of ideas.
The expressive qualities of lambda notations can die in the inherent confusion "am I parsing this sentence-in-lambda left-to-right or right-to-left" -And I really do mean parse, the internal brain-model of "reading the words and symbols" informs how people construct a mental model of what they see.
yes a <- b and b -> a could both mean B is transformed into A but one of them is actually "read" as "a is derived from b" which is different, syntactically, and in comprehension terms
(I don't mean any computing language does this specific notation. I just mean, that how we comprehend this is subtly different, and in the case of first/new programming language, its a higher-order problem. New concepts, new notation)