On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 13:26 +0200, Julian Rohrhuber wrote:
> >On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 09:45 -0400, mcburton wrote:
> >> This looks to be more focused on the visual than audio, but I think
> >> the "visual coding platform" is interesting. What does the toplap
> >> community think of visual coding vs textual coding?
> >
> >diagrammatic languages == text based languages
> >
> >for instance, uml is a system for writing C++ (among other things) via
> >various diagrams and outputs compilable C++, these diagrams can be
> >generated from existing source code - they just represent a different
> >view on the same thing
> >
> >http://www.uml.org/
>
> While I would not reject "diagrammatic live coding" per se, I don't
> agree with your use of "just .. a dfferent view on the same thing".
> It is the view that makes the difference. This is one of the things
> that become evident specially in live coding since the program
> consists also in the programmer modifying the structure of
> representation.
> The traditional product-oriented view of software design does not
> apply to experimental programming, because, as in mathematics, the
> formalism cannot be treated as if it were completely transparent.
It does make a difference, but I can't see how this is different to any
other choice in language. Text is no more or less abstract than diagrams
as far as the machine is concerned. This is one of the things I was
thinking about writing betablocker.
cheers,
dave
Received on Sun Aug 13 2006 - 13:13:47 BST