4 ms·

You've probably seen their blog post from other comments, which doesn't directly address the issue. They essentially made a visual editor for developers - this

You've probably seen their blog post from other comments, which doesn't directly address the issue. They essentially made a visual editor for developers - this is the crux of the issue. It's easy for developers to add, preview, and edit components without a purpose-built visual editor. They appear to suggest that following some of the "technical lessons" in their blog post is what these devs really need - not a visual editor. Having said that, a visual editor would be great for designers who don't want to get their hands dirty with coding.

realusername 8y ago
That's exactly the whole problem with web editors: - If they abstract a lot, you can target designers but then it inevitably produce unmaintainable spaghetti code because it does not know exactly where you are going - If you abstract it less, you can only target developers but what's the point for developers to use an UI when they have to know how to code in the first place?
- elcomet 8y ago
  That's true for now, but I believe we will get there eventually. Who is writing assembly code anymore ? You can argue that compilers produce unmaintanable spaghetti assembly code, which is certainly true. But almost no one will look at the assembly output. The next step we are currently in: a lot of new languages compile to C. And it produces absolutely unreadable code. But who wants to read and write C when you can get the same speed with a much nicer language ? I agree visual editing may be more complicated than compiling / transpiling, but I believe we'll get there eventually, and people will no longer read and write css manually.
  - steve76 8y ago
    C was fixed by adding another language, not trying to take away programming. It really is working at cross purposes. Write code without writing code, when you already know how to write code. If there was an easier way, it will be put into the language. The bulk of it is avoiding teaching lessons which users need to understand. There are security threats out there. It's one thing to prove concept. It's another thing to protect it against people trying to break it.

realusername 8y ago

That's exactly the whole problem with web editors: - If they abstract a lot, you can target designers but then it inevitably produce unmaintainable spaghetti code because it does not know exactly where you are going - If you abstract it less, you can only target developers but what's the point for developers to use an UI when they have to know how to code in the first place?

elcomet 8y ago
That's true for now, but I believe we will get there eventually. Who is writing assembly code anymore ? You can argue that compilers produce unmaintanable spaghetti assembly code, which is certainly true. But almost no one will look at the assembly output. The next step we are currently in: a lot of new languages compile to C. And it produces absolutely unreadable code. But who wants to read and write C when you can get the same speed with a much nicer language ? I agree visual editing may be more complicated than compiling / transpiling, but I believe we'll get there eventually, and people will no longer read and write css manually.
- steve76 8y ago
  C was fixed by adding another language, not trying to take away programming. It really is working at cross purposes. Write code without writing code, when you already know how to write code. If there was an easier way, it will be put into the language. The bulk of it is avoiding teaching lessons which users need to understand. There are security threats out there. It's one thing to prove concept. It's another thing to protect it against people trying to break it.