> interactive/responsive programming -> IDEs, refactoring, time-travel debugging, visual programming spring to mind. > one could argue we actually seem hard-w

> interactive/responsive programming -> IDEs, refactoring, time-travel debugging, visual programming spring to mind. > one could argue we actually seem hard-wired through evolution for linguistic, logical, and symbolic thought. I think you're still talking about programming environments layered on top of the text centric representation, while Victor seems to be talking about something a little different. Sure we can do some symbolic and linguistic manipulation, but consider that rigorous blueprints for physical products such as cars and buildings are 'diagrams', not text. So purely language based description and manipulation doesn't apply everywhere. Now, what if many programs, or parts of programs may be better represented not as text with symbols, but in some other form that we haven't discovered yet?