Programming changed? Forever?

You can program with enum{True,False,FileNotFound} if you want to... Computers are built in base-2 only because it's usually more cost efficient. Current languages could be compiled for a base-3 computer.
Earlier computers used many different number systems.

Quote:

Does this mean that we are able to have more than 1's and 0's?! Imagine, ten years, from now...

Magnetic Hard Disks can save a near infinite number of different states as well.
Analog Computers work with "infinitly" more than just 0's and 1's, this isn't really new ;)

Quote:

Programming will need to change if the hardware changes. This means that variables can then be defined as not binary, but perhaps finally base ten, base three?!

The reason for the Binary system isn't the memory, it's the CPU. As stated earlier, a Base 10 Digital System would have been possible with Magnetic Hard Drives, though quantesizing the different states from 1-10 would create a high possibility of error.
All the Mathematical Operations in the CPU are performed via logical Gates. And these logical Gates only handle false and true.
I don't even know if a Base 10 Digital Calculater (non-biological/mechanical) exists?
And I highly doubt that Intel would reinvest all their money in new CPU technology just to have a Base 10 System.

I don't even know if a Base 10 Digital Calculater (non-biological/mechanical) exists?

As mentioned, Babbage's Analytical Engine used Base 10.
Quantum computers use a qubit which can be 0, 1 or both.

I don't see any of this making programming any easier?

The thing about programming is that it's many layers of indirection. The binary thing is near the bottom of that stack, and most programmers writing, say, C++, wouldn't even notice if the whole "binary layer" changed. They wouldn't need to.

Quote:

Original post by daviangel As mentioned, Babbage's Analytical Engine used Base 10. Quantum computers use a qubit which can be 0, 1 or both.

I counted the Analytical Engine as Mechanical, but the Quantum Computers sound Interesting. I'll have to take a look into that

Quote:

Original post by Thsotus BIGGER variables

Yeah, current variables are too small, especially for hardcore MMORPG programming.

On a more serious note, I think the future in programming is in even more abstraction from hardware, so however cool this new technology is, I don't see it change the job of the average developer.

Microsoft is doomed anyway, because apparently 2011 will be the year of the Linux desktop (and Duke Nukem Forever).

Quote:

Original post by Thsotus THE INTEREST I HAVE IN THIS IS THAT IT CAN SAVE MORE THAN ONE ELECTRICAL STATE. Does this mean that we are able to have more than 1's and 0's?! Imagine, ten years, from now...

From what we've learned at school at least, the electrical/magnetic state is analogue anyway. It's just that we assign "1" and "0" to the maximum/minimum, say -5V for "0" and 5V for "1", so they can be detected with more accuracy. If you decide to sample more frequently, you've got more information, but bigger chance of errors. which you then you have to correct using more hardware, or more software, and so on and so on. At some point, you're going to get errors from simply turning on the TV 5 feet across the room. At least that's what I've understood. On the other hand, it would be great for devices that need to be small and last longer, like those that regulate blood pressure for people with heart problems? Although I guess that's what they intend to use them anyway.

On the other hand, look what teams like the .kkreiger guys have done with just 96KB of storage(program+data, not RAM). I don't like the idea of depending too much on every possible hi-tech gadget that you can think of. With these new GPS things many taxi drivers get lost 5KM from their "base" because they don't have to learn the roads anymore. Or those äugmented reality" things, which you supposedly turn to the Eiffel tower and you get "layers of information"? As if you can't just google Ëiffer tower" while at you're on-site anyway? It's a bit silly.

[Edited by - mikeman on January 5, 2011 10:47:29 AM]

Quote:

Original post by m1o1d1 All the Mathematical Operations in the CPU are performed via logical Gates. And these logical Gates only handle false and true.

The idea that logic gates only handle 'false and true' isn't quite true. It is more correct to say that they work on High vs Low input/output states.

It is possible, and has been done in the past, to produce gates that have a wider range of inputs and outputs. Binary became the dominate, (And then basically the only method used) to produce digital systems because it is fairly easy to make small low voltage systems with only two working states.

The key is that you need a buffer between each state, and if I remember correctly, modern chips technically have 5 states, not two. No/under power, low power, state gap, high power, over power. The chips only produce a valid out put on a low or high power input.

Without the buffer state between logic states, you can produce a region that will rapidly switch between logic states, or be inconsistent between chips due to manufacturing errors.


What does it mean for programmers? Assuming you're not using very low level stuff, it doesn't mean a whole lot.

Quote:

Original post by daviangel Quantum computers use a qubit which can be 0, 1 or both.

That's not really accurate - a qubit can be 0, 1, or 'not yet observed.' The difference is significant because you can't examine a qubit and say 'yep, it's in the "both" state' - you can only determine whether that's true about it from the context in which you're using it (i.e. whether the computer has been directed to observe it yet).

Ternary computers aren't particularly new. The Soviets made some, and I'm sure the Western world did too.

I guess quantum computing will find its niche. From what I have read, quantum computing seems to be more about probability computations (If not, enlighten me. This subject is pretty confusing).
I guess most problems don't lend themselves well to this kind of processor, many problems don't even scale well to parallel processing.

you are already using a quantum computer.

Quote:

Original post by ibebrett you are already using a quantum computer.

are you referring to the human brain?

besides all the nonsense, i personally can't wait for memristors to creep into ram, ssd, and cpu.

it will drastically reduce power needs, and thus massively change the computers design.

i'm interested how the non-need for ram will change os, applications, programming in general. in theory, we could have just one kind of storage by then. we'll see..

i want graphene memristors, actually. up to 100ghz, instant on and off..

there's one thing we know, the future'll be fun.

till then, i plan on getting some sandy bridge fun.

Quote:

Original post by Ravuya Ternary computers aren't particularly new. The Soviets made some, and I'm sure the Western world did too.

It wasn't just "The Soviets". All the major powers and several major schools globally invested in building their own computing engines.

Analog computers were also popular for a while. Ultimately they lost out because the benefits of determinism won over the benefits of arbitrary precision.

It seems the biggest challenge would be creating components to convert bits into current and current back into bits. I guess you could use some sort of resistor ladder, and would only need one resistor ladder for each decoding unit.

I think if anything is going to "change programming forever" it's going to be the shift from low level programming languages to high level programming languages.

When you think of things like the change from binary to whatever, the change from low level to high level makes it somewhat trivial to the majority of programmers as it has little, if any, relevance to the average programmer of the future.

edit: Even something like a really advanced Kodu(sp? the MS graphical programming language for children to learn programming) could be the future.

Quote:

Original post by way2lazy2care I think if anything is going to "change programming forever" it's going to be the shift from low level programming languages to high level programming languages.

For the most part, this has already happened...what are you talking about?

bools could be true, false, OR maybe!