3 ms·
It depends on what kind of problems you're solving. System integrations and ETL-type stuff where it's mostly data transformation and not too much logic are gre
by nitrogen 5y ago
It depends on what kind of problems you're solving. System integrations and ETL-type stuff where it's mostly data transformation and not too much logic are great for visual dataflow programming. It's a lot easier if you can have code-within-blocks and blocks-within-code, too.
Also, I suspect there's going to be a correlation between a preference for spatial vs. lexical reasoning and a preference for visual vs. textual development.
- emteycz 5y agoYeah I agree, I originally built that block-code tool for data transformations and in that domain it is used in practice and very useful. But it's just configuration/queries, no unrestricted coding (the users were shooting their feet too much).
- southerntofu 5y agoThat sounds perfect. If you have a strongly-typed language to develop new blocks in, then surely simple "configuration" for the blocks is enough for visual programming. I'm curious what graphical Rust would look like. The type/trait system seems powerful enough to prevent weird errors at Runtime, while still enabling wide usecases for example with `AsRef<str>` where any type implementing conversion to string can be used.