3 ms·

> modern no-code languages such as Bubble are Turing-complete and require the same kind of programming logic that coding does. > Programming (precise communica

by nayuki 5y ago

> modern no-code languages such as Bubble are Turing-complete and require the same kind of programming logic that coding does. > Programming (precise communication of logic to a computer) != code (precise, text-based communication of logic to a computer). This is a recipe for disaster. Systems that are capable of Turing-complete computation are already hard to understand when written in code; I can only imagine they are harder to understand if they are communicated in pictures or something else. Examples of dubious no-code (or less-code) environments include: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LabVIEW https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LabVIEW , e.g. https://blog.jki.net/a-recipe-for-spaghetti-code-in-labview-part-1 https://blog.jki.net/a-recipe-for-spaghetti-code-in-labview-... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scratch_(programming_language) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scratch_(programming_language) , e.g. https://www.how2shout.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/scratch-Desktop-application.jpg https://www.how2shout.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/scratch...

bmitc 5y ago
> Examples of dubious no-code (or less-code) environments include: > * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LabVIEW https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LabVIEW , e.g. https://blog.jki.net/a-recipe-for-spaghetti-code-in-labview- https://blog.jki.net/a-recipe-for-spaghetti-code-in-labview-... It gets super tiring to see that picture get posted every time LabVIEW or visual programming environments get brought up and the sentiment you stated quoted. It's as if people who have never even used the language dismiss 8 years of my professional career simply because they don't understand it. I've said it before, and so I'll say it again. No proper LabVIEW engineer who cares about code quality would ever do this. The "problem" with LabVIEW is that it immediately showcases your spaghetti code. Spaghetti code in a text-based language looks like any other code, upon first glance. This is in fact a feature of visual programming languages. LabVIEW has libraries (aka modules), clusters (aka structs), immutable value-based (not reference-based) OOP (something along the lines of F#'s records or Elixir's structs but with encapsulation, inheritance, and interfaces), VIs (aka functions), polymorphism, and more. Beyond that, LabVIEW even has some unique features like malleable VIs. These features are to be used to get modular, clean LabVIEW code. I find that people who hold the opinion that you wrote have never spent any actual time with LabVIEW, and if they did, it wasn't for an extended period of time and/or they didn't treat as a programming language. The way I think about and write LabVIEW is really no different from the way I think about and write in F# or Elixir. Lastly, LabVIEW is not a no-code or low-code environment. It is code. It is a language that compiles down to an intermediate graph representation that then compiles down to LLVM IR or, in the case of FPGAs, VHDL and Vivado HLS.
- hackernewds 5y ago
  LabVIEW is stunning. Also works great for engineering since visualizing control theory is important in real-world scenarios more than it is in virtual. I wouldn't consider LabVIEW no code either.

by nayuki 5y ago

bmitc 5y ago

> Examples of dubious no-code (or less-code) environments include: > * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LabVIEW https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LabVIEW , e.g. https://blog.jki.net/a-recipe-for-spaghetti-code-in-labview- https://blog.jki.net/a-recipe-for-spaghetti-code-in-labview-... It gets super tiring to see that picture get posted every time LabVIEW or visual programming environments get brought up and the sentiment you stated quoted. It's as if people who have never even used the language dismiss 8 years of my professional career simply because they don't understand it. I've said it before, and so I'll say it again. No proper LabVIEW engineer who cares about code quality would ever do this. The "problem" with LabVIEW is that it immediately showcases your spaghetti code. Spaghetti code in a text-based language looks like any other code, upon first glance. This is in fact a feature of visual programming languages. LabVIEW has libraries (aka modules), clusters (aka structs), immutable value-based (not reference-based) OOP (something along the lines of F#'s records or Elixir's structs but with encapsulation, inheritance, and interfaces), VIs (aka functions), polymorphism, and more. Beyond that, LabVIEW even has some unique features like malleable VIs. These features are to be used to get modular, clean LabVIEW code. I find that people who hold the opinion that you wrote have never spent any actual time with LabVIEW, and if they did, it wasn't for an extended period of time and/or they didn't treat as a programming language. The way I think about and write LabVIEW is really no different from the way I think about and write in F# or Elixir. Lastly, LabVIEW is not a no-code or low-code environment. It is code. It is a language that compiles down to an intermediate graph representation that then compiles down to LLVM IR or, in the case of FPGAs, VHDL and Vivado HLS.

hackernewds 5y ago
LabVIEW is stunning. Also works great for engineering since visualizing control theory is important in real-world scenarios more than it is in virtual. I wouldn't consider LabVIEW no code either.