|
aka "operation" vs "design". I agree, for targeting that explicitly as a pedagogical or philosophical end in itself.
A cool ideal, btw (though I think it works better with less powerful programming - more concrete, perhaps only regular or context free not turing complete). In real (non-coding) life, there's usually overlap, of "adjustments". e.g. you're cutting tomatoes with a knife, and adjust the knife's angle, or your grip, or move the tomato, spin it on a vertical axis, rotate it, try sawing vs slicing, maybe change knives, etc. Perhaps you exclaim "This is the best knife for tomatoes!" and resolve to use only it henceforth. But many of these adjustments are unconscious, and part of everything we do. Is it "operation" or "design"? I think it's fuzzy in practice; we often chip away at things as we learn and adapt. True, in software, there's usually a sharp line between user (operating) and programmer (designing). Customization crosses that line: macros, templates - even, hiding menus you don't use.
Is hiding a menu "programming"? While not turing complete, it's a step closer to it. I agree there's not much market for the combination, in itself. Programming is so accessible these days, if you want to do it, you just do it. Probably starting with HTML "programming", then Javascript or PHP. It even looks like a real website! It's like hypercard, but global. |