|
|
|
|
|
by yoelhacks
696 days ago
|
|
I think there's a very important real-world nuance here. What you want with a programming language is to handle granular logic in a very explicit way (business requirements, precise calculations, etc.). What this article posits, and what I agree with, is that existing languages offer a more concise way of doing that. If I wanted to program in a visual way, I'd probably still want / need the ability to do specific operations using a written artifact (language, SQL, etc). Combining them in different ways visually as a first-class operation would only interest me if it operated at the level of abstraction that visualizations currently operate at, many great examples of which are offered in the article (multiple code files, system architecture, network call). |
|
⸻
1. Although I must confess that I have a mental block about the second and third components of a C-style for-loop and whenever possible, I avoid them if I can.