4 ms·

That's really not true. The XML Snap exports to is a completely different language from Snap. You're not versioning Snap, you're versioning the XML that Snap e

That's really not true. The XML Snap exports to is a completely different language from Snap. You're not versioning Snap, you're versioning the XML that Snap exports to, and unless you're really planning to hand-code software in XML the composability is just not going to be there. Version control involves tying code changes to functionality changes, and unless you're directly writing the XML you have no way of being sure that such things are maintained. Yes, you can version it, but you're versioning it as a black box, in the same sense as you would version an MP3 or a JPEG. The XML allows you better compression than a binary format, but it doesn't give you the ability to textually navigate changesets.

Turing_Machine 11y ago
Yes, it really is true. The XML is not a "completely different language". It is an alternative (but 1:1) representation of the internal Snap code. There's no absolutely reason why the Snap UI couldn't be feeding the XML to a version control system behind the scenes, and recovering previous versions from that system at will.
- copsarebastards 11y ago
  > Yes, it really is true. The XML is not a "completely different language". It is an alternative (but 1:1) representation of the internal Snap code. Oh really? What is the 1:1 representation of a diff on XML in the visual code? Representation in a programming language is a huge feature of the language, and it's particularly ridiculous to claim that it isn't for a language whose key feature is having a visual representation rather than a textual representation. An alternative representation of a programming language is a completely different programming language. > There's no absolutely reason why the Snap UI couldn't be feeding the XML to a version control system behind the scenes, and recovering previous versions from that system at will. Yes, but that's not even the most commonly used functionality of version control. How do you propose we do visual merges? Or are you actually proposing that we write code directly in XML?

Turing_Machine 11y ago

Yes, it really is true. The XML is not a "completely different language". It is an alternative (but 1:1) representation of the internal Snap code. There's no absolutely reason why the Snap UI couldn't be feeding the XML to a version control system behind the scenes, and recovering previous versions from that system at will.

copsarebastards 11y ago
> Yes, it really is true. The XML is not a "completely different language". It is an alternative (but 1:1) representation of the internal Snap code. Oh really? What is the 1:1 representation of a diff on XML in the visual code? Representation in a programming language is a huge feature of the language, and it's particularly ridiculous to claim that it isn't for a language whose key feature is having a visual representation rather than a textual representation. An alternative representation of a programming language is a completely different programming language. > There's no absolutely reason why the Snap UI couldn't be feeding the XML to a version control system behind the scenes, and recovering previous versions from that system at will. Yes, but that's not even the most commonly used functionality of version control. How do you propose we do visual merges? Or are you actually proposing that we write code directly in XML?