'Visual Programming and Why It Sucks'

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Vicente Soler on September 9, 2012 at 11:44am

I guess the title is intentionally harsh to attract viewers, but in the last paragraph you could substitute PlayMaker with Grasshopper and I couldn't agree more:

So is visual programming all bad? Well, no. It does bring with it a few benefits.

As I mentioned before, not having a syntax or an API that you have to memorize is great. Especially for people that aren’t programmers or interested in programming. It also works well when you’ve got good modules that make your program seem trivial. I suspect that for the sort of games/applications that PlayMaker’s users are creating, it works more than just well. And from what I understand, PlayMaker also supports a hybrid approach where you can still write the code and interface it with the visual code. Perhaps this brings out the best of both worlds?

 

Another upside is that it's sort of like the weed of programming. It softens the learning curve and acts as a gateway for people with no previous coding background to learn how to script.

Permalink Reply by Ángel Linares on September 9, 2012 at 12:18pm

Loving this comment:

Back in the 1970's I heard: "There's an old saying: 'Visual programming is like trying to get to the moon by climbing a tree. You make a lot of good early progress, at first, but pretty soon you have to go back to your funding agency and ask for a bigger tree."

Permalink Reply by Ángel Linares on September 9, 2012 at 12:32pm

IMHO : a good mix between visual and traditional programming is not very different to the use of OOP. You define classes & functions (components) that connects using a static data type layout (inputs & outputs) . If you build your own components the workflow could be quite similar. It's true that some structures like recursion or loops are not easy to achieve in visual programming but some tools like hoopsnake are trying to solve that.

Permalink Reply by Luis Fraguada on September 9, 2012 at 3:41pm

I suppose its a matter of what people can do with the system.  Each VPL should be measured against what users an get out of it.  Seems if we measure it against the objectives of our professions / fields, Grasshopper gets many part of the way there...in the office though, I can't think of any important definition that did not have some sort of scripted code...