3 ms·

There's something I've ignored here, which is that most of these systems are at a higher level of abstraction than text-based languages. Modules (called "object

There's something I've ignored here, which is that most of these systems are at a higher level of abstraction than text-based languages. Modules (called "objects") in Max, for instance, are written in C. Max is more analogous to Unix than an actual programming language (by admission of its author). A question for me is why we write things like web servers in a programming language at all. After using dataflow systems, I believe there are much better abstractions possible than Rails-style web frameworks.

nikster 13y ago
Same for most user interfaces. I am writing client side iOS apps and frankly doing most of that stuff in Obj-C, or any text based language - seems to make very little sense. It's a tool that seems ill suited to the task.
rdtsc 13y ago
These ideas are not new. And _general_ click and drag programming has been "just around the corner" since GUIs became popular. Now in specific domain, industrial & control system, signal processing, even designing GUIs themselves, click and drag has worked. It lets non-programmers but subject matter experts get stuff done. But for generic stuff it hasn't worked too well. UML was one such push. Managers were just going to draw a diagram on the screen, click, "Generate Code" and bam, no need for silly code monkeys anymore. Well it hasn't quite worked that way. Now the "Generate Code" button just does an SMTP send to a .ch or .in domain some place. There is another such system. Quite exotic called DRAKON. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAKON https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAKON It comes the Soviet space shuttle program. Yes they had a successful space shuttle once that few unmanned and even landed itself (before US space shuttles could even do that). Some of the people working on that wanted to bring programming down to non-programming engineers. And created that system. There was some interested in it lately as well. But can't say it exactly took over the world.
- msutherl 13y ago
  In my casual experience with such systems, they are extremely limited compared to something like Max, which is in turn extremely limited and badly designed. Max is not just 'click and drag' – you can do quite complex configuration, cross-modulation of signals and parameters, etc. plus general purpose programming. You can also script things with JavaScript or Lua and write new routines ("objects") in C, Java, languages that compile to Java, and JavaScript. They key is that the dataflow environment specifies a strict interface between "objects" and an overall execution pattern, but you can dig in to the stuff you're clicking on and change/optimize the underlying code. Recently Cycling '74 (who make Max) added a new lower-level dataflow language that maps to C code or alternately GLSL shaders, which makes it super easy for people who don't know how to program to write efficient, auto-optimized audio and graphics routines. Another system along those lines is Faust: http://faust.grame.fr/ http://faust.grame.fr/. For a more open-ended system that combines dataflow ideas with traditional programming concepts, a time-line editor, and in-text GUI controls, check out Field: http://www.openendedgroup.com/field/ http://www.openendedgroup.com/field/. DRAKON looks like a naive low-level attempt at sticking imperative routines into flowcharts. Diagrammed UML systems sound awful – you probably lose all the power of object oriented programming by transposing it into a GUI. Signal chain diagram languages like MATLAB's SIMULINK[1], Analog Devices' Signal Chain Designer[2], or Cypress' PSoC Designer are usually very basic and nothing like what a proper dataflow system could be. [1] http://www.mathworks.com/products/simulink/ http://www.mathworks.com/products/simulink/ [2] http://www.analog.com/en/content/Signal_Chain_Designer/fca.html http://www.analog.com/en/content/Signal_Chain_Designer/fca.h... [3] http://www.cypress.com/?id=2492&source=productshome http://www.cypress.com/?id=2492&source=productshome

nikster 13y ago

Same for most user interfaces. I am writing client side iOS apps and frankly doing most of that stuff in Obj-C, or any text based language - seems to make very little sense. It's a tool that seems ill suited to the task.

rdtsc 13y ago

These ideas are not new. And _general_ click and drag programming has been "just around the corner" since GUIs became popular. Now in specific domain, industrial & control system, signal processing, even designing GUIs themselves, click and drag has worked. It lets non-programmers but subject matter experts get stuff done. But for generic stuff it hasn't worked too well. UML was one such push. Managers were just going to draw a diagram on the screen, click, "Generate Code" and bam, no need for silly code monkeys anymore. Well it hasn't quite worked that way. Now the "Generate Code" button just does an SMTP send to a .ch or .in domain some place. There is another such system. Quite exotic called DRAKON. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAKON https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAKON It comes the Soviet space shuttle program. Yes they had a successful space shuttle once that few unmanned and even landed itself (before US space shuttles could even do that). Some of the people working on that wanted to bring programming down to non-programming engineers. And created that system. There was some interested in it lately as well. But can't say it exactly took over the world.

msutherl 13y ago
In my casual experience with such systems, they are extremely limited compared to something like Max, which is in turn extremely limited and badly designed. Max is not just 'click and drag' – you can do quite complex configuration, cross-modulation of signals and parameters, etc. plus general purpose programming. You can also script things with JavaScript or Lua and write new routines ("objects") in C, Java, languages that compile to Java, and JavaScript. They key is that the dataflow environment specifies a strict interface between "objects" and an overall execution pattern, but you can dig in to the stuff you're clicking on and change/optimize the underlying code. Recently Cycling '74 (who make Max) added a new lower-level dataflow language that maps to C code or alternately GLSL shaders, which makes it super easy for people who don't know how to program to write efficient, auto-optimized audio and graphics routines. Another system along those lines is Faust: http://faust.grame.fr/ http://faust.grame.fr/. For a more open-ended system that combines dataflow ideas with traditional programming concepts, a time-line editor, and in-text GUI controls, check out Field: http://www.openendedgroup.com/field/ http://www.openendedgroup.com/field/. DRAKON looks like a naive low-level attempt at sticking imperative routines into flowcharts. Diagrammed UML systems sound awful – you probably lose all the power of object oriented programming by transposing it into a GUI. Signal chain diagram languages like MATLAB's SIMULINK[1], Analog Devices' Signal Chain Designer[2], or Cypress' PSoC Designer are usually very basic and nothing like what a proper dataflow system could be. [1] http://www.mathworks.com/products/simulink/ http://www.mathworks.com/products/simulink/ [2] http://www.analog.com/en/content/Signal_Chain_Designer/fca.html http://www.analog.com/en/content/Signal_Chain_Designer/fca.h... [3] http://www.cypress.com/?id=2492&source=productshome http://www.cypress.com/?id=2492&source=productshome