On Friday, May 6, 2016 at 1:24:19 PM UTC-5, William Hermans wrote: > So wally I didn't want to step all over Jason's post by discussing this > further, there. Also keep in mind that this is just a discussion. There is > not right or wrong, only right or wrong for individuals. Or personal > beliefs if you will. > > These graphical or visual programming languages you denigrate really do >> help scientists, engineers, and other "domain experts" who aren't, and >> don't want to become, "programmers" implement an idea for which there is >> not, and will never be until the idea is proven sound, a budget for "hiring >> real programmers". >> > > > I have a friend who is a scientist, who has picked up programming pretty > easily. He might use Python, which I particularly do not care for, but he > is able to write code that is mostly competent. Just not as easily or > quickly as someone who is more experienced. Passed that, I've read many > white papers written by scientist's and if they're serious, they will learn > how to program, and indeed many have. One white paper particular where a > scientist blew my mind discussing the use of abstract generic templates in > C++ . . . a very complex concept. > > I wont deny that these types of programs are good for prototyping concepts > for a proof of concept. The problem is, passed that you have many who want > to use these applications to write production code, and I honestly do not > think the technology is there yet. And won't be there for a long time. > > I have had the pleasure of introducing a few scientists to things like Matlab, but they were motivated to be "self-sufficient", I've known a few others who purchased something like Delphi (Pascal) and just jumped right into it with good success. But most have a full plate keeping up with their specialty and really don't want to be "programmers" -- if they had the budgets they's just hire one to do it. Its when there is a good idea and insufficient budget to develop it that these "visual or graphical" systems can help get things going.
As to production code, depends on what the product is, and the volume produced -- I've been involved in several labs where they run on Labview with no "real programmers" -- the product is publishing a research paper and the volume is one instance to accomplish the research goals. As to the the friend I'm helping which got me playing with node-red in the first place, the fundamental trade-off is he just wants to accomplish something to make his life easier. He sees the virtues of using a micro-controller like PIC or Arduino, or a small computer like the Beaglebone or Raspberry Pi, but its not his life's ambition, its just a task to get done. Throwing a computer into the mix has a pretty steep entry fee in terms of the time and effort he needs to put into "learning" to use it vs. simply accomplishing his task by just wiring up relays, timers, bang-bang or PID controller modules etc. the way he's always done in the past. Once he succeeds with a computerized project, he might very well see dramatically more possibilities and then be motivated to learn Python or Javascript etc., but until then the entry fee is just too steep. Its in lowering the barrier to entry that these visual/graphical programming systems offer promise. The developers see the need, or they would be developing these systems. In fact node-red with its function nodes and rode-red-node-beaglebone (unfortunately broken for the two newest images I've tried) lets one ease into learning Javascript in the context of a doing something the stock modules can't quite get right instead of starting with a blank page. Unfortunately, at present, node-red and bonescript just plain aren't ready for a newbie to just buy one and get started. The Raspberry Pi Raspbian Jessie images are much closer, the 2016-05-01 testing image would be about caught up to the Pi except for yet another kernel change that broke the bonescript PWM. Unless other folks jump in, its pretty pointless for the two of us to banter back and forth about this. -- For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BeagleBoard" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beagleboard/5bc9ea88-f9c9-4c21-81e9-f9570352beed%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
