4 ms·

This is great, but the author already has a ton of working code and a framework that he can plug and play into. When I see these types of demos of live coding,

This is great, but the author already has a ton of working code and a framework that he can plug and play into. When I see these types of demos of live coding, I always wonder what it looks like when nothing is working, and when you aren't exactly sure how things are going to come together. Is it worth it, or just an interesting distraction?

brucehauman 13y ago
As the OP I firmly believe that this is more than just a distraction. I don't have a ton of code and a framework that I am leaning on. I am leaning only on a practice. And that practice is to write functional code and then reap its many benefits. One of those benefits is being able to see my running programs change in real time. In the ClojureScript community we passed a threshold where we can now program interactively, I am simply pointing out that occurance.
- seanmcdirmid 13y ago
  As any small talker would tell you, functional programming isn't the only way to reap these benefits; also see the videos linked in: http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/211297/managedtime.pdf http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/211297/managedtime.pdf The trick is not to avoid state, but rather have a sane relationship with it.
- pjmlp 13y ago
  > One of those benefits is being able to see my running programs change in real time. Those benefits were all available in the Xerox PARC systems: - Smalltalk - Interlisp - Mesa/Cedar But thanks to many mistakes, the world got UNIX instead and now newer generations are rediscovering what interactive coding really means.
  - enen 13y ago
    Could you elaborate. I'm curious why interactive programming isn't more popular.
    - pjmlp 13y ago
      Most likely because: - Xerox PARC systems were too expensive for most companies. Alan Kay says if you want the future today, you must be willing to build the hardware from 15 years in the future - The commercial attempts to bring Smalltalk and Lisp into the market failed, mainly due to mismanagement and the high prices - The first set of UNIX clones start spreading into the industry, were much less expensive and good enough - Attempts to replicate Smalltalk and Lisp interactive experience in common early 80's hardware failed short to provide the same experience as in the Dorado and Star systems. - Younger developer generations educated in UNIX and microcomputer OS never experienced such systems - Probably something else
      - enen 13y ago
        Thanks, that's an interesting topic
        pjmlp 13y ago
        You might find these videos interesting, cross linked from another discussion. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7565751 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7565751 These systems were working in the late 70's, early 80's as personal workstations. Now compare with what many developers still use today.

brucehauman 13y ago

As the OP I firmly believe that this is more than just a distraction. I don't have a ton of code and a framework that I am leaning on. I am leaning only on a practice. And that practice is to write functional code and then reap its many benefits. One of those benefits is being able to see my running programs change in real time. In the ClojureScript community we passed a threshold where we can now program interactively, I am simply pointing out that occurance.

seanmcdirmid 13y ago
As any small talker would tell you, functional programming isn't the only way to reap these benefits; also see the videos linked in: http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/211297/managedtime.pdf http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/211297/managedtime.pdf The trick is not to avoid state, but rather have a sane relationship with it.
pjmlp 13y ago
> One of those benefits is being able to see my running programs change in real time. Those benefits were all available in the Xerox PARC systems: - Smalltalk - Interlisp - Mesa/Cedar But thanks to many mistakes, the world got UNIX instead and now newer generations are rediscovering what interactive coding really means.
- enen 13y ago
  Could you elaborate. I'm curious why interactive programming isn't more popular.
  - pjmlp 13y ago
    Most likely because: - Xerox PARC systems were too expensive for most companies. Alan Kay says if you want the future today, you must be willing to build the hardware from 15 years in the future - The commercial attempts to bring Smalltalk and Lisp into the market failed, mainly due to mismanagement and the high prices - The first set of UNIX clones start spreading into the industry, were much less expensive and good enough - Attempts to replicate Smalltalk and Lisp interactive experience in common early 80's hardware failed short to provide the same experience as in the Dorado and Star systems. - Younger developer generations educated in UNIX and microcomputer OS never experienced such systems - Probably something else
    - enen 13y ago
      Thanks, that's an interesting topic
      - pjmlp 13y ago
        You might find these videos interesting, cross linked from another discussion. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7565751 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7565751 These systems were working in the late 70's, early 80's as personal workstations. Now compare with what many developers still use today.