4 ms·

Python is low-code compared to assembler. SQL is low-code. Much discussion around low-code (and no-code) miss that it is just abstraction. The question is not

Python is low-code compared to assembler. SQL is low-code. Much discussion around low-code (and no-code) miss that it is just abstraction. The question is not if we should use abstractions or not, but what constiutes good and bad abstractions.

lioeters 3y ago
Another term for "low code" is end-user programming. > Despite forty years of commercial products, open source, and deep academic work, we have yet to reach an end-user programming utopia. In fact, the opposite: today our computing devices are less programmable and less customizable than ever before. https://www.inkandswitch.com/end-user-programming/ https://www.inkandswitch.com/end-user-programming/ COBOL, BASIC, SQL. HTML, CSS, JavaScript. All these started as relatively low-code solutions to what came before. And surely textual programming languages aren't the only way to empower users to take control of personal computing. Excel formulae to express dynamic values. Visual builders that internally compile to syntax trees. They all have their own problems and room for improvement, but one could say the same for "high code" programming languages. It's a means to an end, and for computer users who don't have time to dedicate to become a high-coder, they will use whatever is available to solve their needs.