4 ms·
It always felt to me like when people use words like "intuitiveness" or "usability", they're all pointing at slightly different things. Matt Fuller's partitioni
by Pete_D 9y ago
It always felt to me like when people use words like "intuitiveness" or "usability", they're all pointing at slightly different things. Matt Fuller's partitioning of user-friendliness into "easy to use", "easy to learn", and "easy to use without learning"[0] feels like it might be easier to set objective criteria for. For your example, you might say functional programming tends to be easy to use, but hard to learn and hard to use without learning.
(I'm not current on PL/HCI literature, so it wouldn't surprise me if they already have these concepts, just with different labels.)
[0] https://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/userfriendly/2 https://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/userfriendly/2
- zzzcpan 9y agoI don't think you can define an objective criteria for any of these terms, since they depend on previous experience and are inherently subjective. Instead more commonly used terms to more precisely describe "intuitiveness" or "usability" are: simplicity, consistency, universality, familiarity and flexibility.