3 ms·

> But normal people is happy with the specific solutions in the meantime. I'm not discussing whether they are "happy". I'm arguing that Visual Programming come

> But normal people is happy with the specific solutions in the meantime. I'm not discussing whether they are "happy". I'm arguing that Visual Programming comes with some massive drawbacks. Whether people are aware of them or not is irrelevant. There's such a thing as being contentedly stuck in a local minima. I believe that there are objective drawbacks (to both approaches actually). Whether you currently enjoy using them or not doesn't have much bearing on the point that things could be much better.

whstl 3y ago
> I'm arguing that Visual Programming comes with some massive drawbacks And textual programming comes with even bigger drawbacks. I don't want to care about programming things like memory, time complexity, nulls, or code style when I'm programming a synth patch in Max or Reaktor, or when writing a spreadsheet. If needed, I can just use a compiler. > many tasks that are simple with text are complex in all the visual tools I've tried. And many tasks that are simple with visual programming are incredibly complex with textual programming. There is a reason people use it, and part of it about embracing the paradigm, rather than trying to emulate what you already know in it.
- andybak 3y ago
  > memory, time complexity, nulls, or code style None of these are specific to text vs visual. Except maybe "code style" and that has a direct analogue in visual programming (and arguably one that's harder to manage). > If needed, I can just use a compiler. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, this is another orthogonal concern. > And many tasks that are simple with visual programming are incredibly complex with textual programming. I never said otherwise. > There is a reason people use it, and part of it about embracing the paradigm, rather than trying to emulate what you already know in it. There most certainly are very good reasons to use visual programming. But that doesn't make the pain points disappear. I'm not sure how to put this any clearer but what I'm trying to say "They both suck. I think we can do better..."

whstl 3y ago

> I'm arguing that Visual Programming comes with some massive drawbacks And textual programming comes with even bigger drawbacks. I don't want to care about programming things like memory, time complexity, nulls, or code style when I'm programming a synth patch in Max or Reaktor, or when writing a spreadsheet. If needed, I can just use a compiler. > many tasks that are simple with text are complex in all the visual tools I've tried. And many tasks that are simple with visual programming are incredibly complex with textual programming. There is a reason people use it, and part of it about embracing the paradigm, rather than trying to emulate what you already know in it.

andybak 3y ago
> memory, time complexity, nulls, or code style None of these are specific to text vs visual. Except maybe "code style" and that has a direct analogue in visual programming (and arguably one that's harder to manage). > If needed, I can just use a compiler. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, this is another orthogonal concern. > And many tasks that are simple with visual programming are incredibly complex with textual programming. I never said otherwise. > There is a reason people use it, and part of it about embracing the paradigm, rather than trying to emulate what you already know in it. There most certainly are very good reasons to use visual programming. But that doesn't make the pain points disappear. I'm not sure how to put this any clearer but what I'm trying to say "They both suck. I think we can do better..."