4 ms·
Diff tools might actually be able to work better on graphical/flowchart code. It could theoretically be easier for the tools to identify exactly what changed a
by kettlecorn 7y ago
Diff tools might actually be able to work better on graphical/flowchart code.
It could theoretically be easier for the tools to identify exactly what changed and present that information rather than superfluous stuff like whitespace changes.
- Pamar 7y agoMy questions are based on actual experience using a "graphical" language [1]... I am not using it anymore, but the "theoretical" advantages you mention never actually became real for me (or my former colleagues still using it, either). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebMethods_Flow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebMethods_Flow
- kettlecorn 7y agoI don't doubt that existing graphical languages have very poor tooling. I believe that diff tools could be better if they operate on some format that represents the meaning of the code, not the details of how it's written. New tools would have to be written, so it's largely a matter of pragmatism and momentum that prevents such a thing. FYI I googled "WebMethods Flow merge tools" and one of the more useful discussions actually featured you from 3 years ago expressing similar sentiment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12106945 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12106945
- Pamar 7y agoI am old so I tend to repeat myself a lot :) Honestly - I would be happy to use a graphical (or any other alternative to traditional) language. I was reasonably enthusiastic when I started working with webMethods and some things I like a lot. But honestly I cannot say it scales well beyond simple transformations / mapping tasks.