4 ms·

I actually started writing a blog post along this theme but never got very far with it. I'm not against code storage and representation as text per-se, merely

I actually started writing a blog post along this theme but never got very far with it. I'm not against code storage and representation as text per-se, merely that typing/editing it (text) is a not particularly efficient way of thinking about code. A lot of people I'd characterise as 'words-per-minute is everything' style thinking are seeking the most efficient way to convert thoughts into text input. From punch-tape to mechanical keyboards the ultimate goal of programming language development is a 'faster keyboard'. I think this focus on text input as foundational is incorrect. Most text isn't meaningful, the subset of meaningful text is severely constrained by the execution environment of the text. Outside of variable names and naming functions text input just isn't that interesting or important. For example unless you have previously declared one, invoking a function named `ttoString` isn't useful. This is why I think coding outside some form of IDE (how far along that spectrum is up for debate, but I'd say autocomplete at minimum) is somewhat inefficient. Code is text, but it's also a layer on top of the text, the set of possibilities defined both by the text and the compiler/interpreter (or more specifically as you mention in your comment, AST). Treating code as text where you might rename a function with find-and-replace is frankly, daft and backwards. Your tools should rename the concept/symbol/whatever you're targetting specifically and they should understand your intent and meaning. By focusing monomaniacally on text we're ending up with worse tools. This also scales to text input more generally. For some reason spell-checking doesn't work for me in Firefox so I'll have no doubt made a bunch of spelling mistakes in this post and it feels a considerably worse way of typing. I don't particularly value the ability to write "ocurence" since it's incorrect. I'd rather have tools that assist me communicating efficiently in a manner understoof (sic) by others. Text is fine but tools are great. This develops into a more general objection to languages like Python/Ruby/JS but that's a whole other flamewar.

the_af 4y ago
To be clear: I don't think about text and text input in terms of efficiency. Well, that too -- almost every other form of input feels clumsier to me, but that may be because I'm more used to text. But I think typing efficiency is a red herring, a fetish of hackers who also worry about mechanical keyboards and keyboard layouts and "you cannot code unless you use three 4K monitors at a minimum". That's a fetish -- time with code is spent thinking about it, not typing words or even clicking with the mouse. Still, many here will fight to the death to claim these are very important things, even crucial; and I'll politely disagree. I think text reigns supreme because it's more universal, less convoluted, and has zero vendor lock-in. If you want, the tools to read and edit source code come with your operating system! There have been tons of musings, thoughts and even projects to replace text representation of code. Where is their widespread success? I think text is the ultimate "worse is better", in the positive sense of that concept.
- UglyToad 4y ago
  Thanks for the response. I think we probably ultimately agree. I was taking aim at that second group you outline with my rant. I had always assumed punch-tape was encoding some other representation of code than text until I did the research for my blog post. I think text is here to stay and I don't have any real problems with that. Where my tools offer designers or visual editors for code/UIs I still prefer to use text. As an on-ramp to programming nothing quite beat opening up an HTML file in Notepad (or text editor of choice), making some changes and seeing that your header now flashed and was red. I do think however that much like digging on a beach with a plastic bucket and spade is fun when you are young and carefree; when you're being paid to dig holes you want the biggest shiniest JCB you can get. I am mainly reacting to the second group who curl their lips with disdain at the idea of doing anything other than coding in Nano or whatever pure text environment. They seem to see programming as a priestly sect dedicated to text like Lindisfarne's monks and people who don't know their Cherry Reds from Browns as fake/noob/impostor programmers.

the_af 4y ago

To be clear: I don't think about text and text input in terms of efficiency. Well, that too -- almost every other form of input feels clumsier to me, but that may be because I'm more used to text. But I think typing efficiency is a red herring, a fetish of hackers who also worry about mechanical keyboards and keyboard layouts and "you cannot code unless you use three 4K monitors at a minimum". That's a fetish -- time with code is spent thinking about it, not typing words or even clicking with the mouse. Still, many here will fight to the death to claim these are very important things, even crucial; and I'll politely disagree. I think text reigns supreme because it's more universal, less convoluted, and has zero vendor lock-in. If you want, the tools to read and edit source code come with your operating system! There have been tons of musings, thoughts and even projects to replace text representation of code. Where is their widespread success? I think text is the ultimate "worse is better", in the positive sense of that concept.

UglyToad 4y ago
Thanks for the response. I think we probably ultimately agree. I was taking aim at that second group you outline with my rant. I had always assumed punch-tape was encoding some other representation of code than text until I did the research for my blog post. I think text is here to stay and I don't have any real problems with that. Where my tools offer designers or visual editors for code/UIs I still prefer to use text. As an on-ramp to programming nothing quite beat opening up an HTML file in Notepad (or text editor of choice), making some changes and seeing that your header now flashed and was red. I do think however that much like digging on a beach with a plastic bucket and spade is fun when you are young and carefree; when you're being paid to dig holes you want the biggest shiniest JCB you can get. I am mainly reacting to the second group who curl their lips with disdain at the idea of doing anything other than coding in Nano or whatever pure text environment. They seem to see programming as a priestly sect dedicated to text like Lindisfarne's monks and people who don't know their Cherry Reds from Browns as fake/noob/impostor programmers.