Mads Lindstr�m wrote:
Jesper Louis Andersen wrote:
I do not think one can learn from APL. The world is much changed today.
However, programming in diagrams and the like sounds awfully like
CASE-tools of the start of the nineties - which did not prevail either.
I am sorry to say that I newer really tried any of these CASE tools.
Therefore, I have no idea why these tools failed. If anybody think they
got the answer I would like to hear it. Maybe the reasons for failure
are relevant for what I am proposing, maybe they are not.
The CASE tools failed because they were too specialized. The basic
premise, or idea, were that one could build a typical bussiness
application by drag-n-drop. The tools were quite good at that. You could
literally paint Database-relation schemas, GUIs and link them together.
The problem were the glue, which was quite weak compared to other
programming languages like Java or (especially) Haskell.
Because you had to do some coding in order to glue things together. Not
much, but you had to. Also, most of the basic logic is not possible to
do with painting, how nice that could be for a visually adept person
like me.
I do not think the tools failed because of what you are proposing. The
idea of presenting programs in other forms than ASCII is fine, as long
as you do help the programmer and do not introduce unnecessary
constraints, irritations or just general clunkiness.
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
