[LyndsySimon]

Interesting.

Given the level of knowledge the author now has of the underlying data structure and algorithmic thinking, I suspect that learning a "real" programming language would only be a small leap and would open up a ton of capabilities for them.

That's pretty much been my experience with visual SQL query builders as well - by the time someone is able to use it efficiently, they are not only a small step from just writing the code, but they'll end up being many times faster if they did. That said, I think visual development definitely has a place; it's great for visualizing the relationships between things and reducing complexity. Once that's done, optimizations and sometimes the actual implementation of the blocks you're connecting is best done in traditional code.

[leeale10]

That's a good point. I don't have much traditional programming experience myself, but have found that Bubble has help me "speak the same language" as those who program with code. Perhaps there is an interesting place for tools like Bubble to be a middle-ground for those learning the principles behind coding.

Why is it you think that someone like the author would be able to code many times faster than they could develop software visually through Bubble?

[LyndsySimon]

> Why is it you think that someone like the author would be able to code many times faster than they could develop software visually through Bubble?

Thinking about how things go together is the hard part of writing software. Every time I've ever used a visual interface to show that, I've had to spend additional time to "translate" what I'm building into what's actually happening on the layer underneath. The abstraction is too leaky to be of use to me.

It's possible that there is a visual language out there that's not so leaky, but I've not seen it. Granted I've not used Bubble.