Re:Luna: Visual and textual functional programming language
by king_magic on Sunday February 21, 2016 @12:16PM
(#11145341)
How long did we try to get UML to work? There's a reason that visual representations haven't taken off, it's not like they haven't been tried before. And don't get me wrong - there are absolutely use cases for these types of tools, but at the end of the day, I think there are just too many challenges in visual representation for this to to work for "any application" (as Luna claims).
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Luna: Visual and textual functional programming language
by coldtea on Sunday February 21, 2016 @12:19PM
(#11145361)
UML solved a non problem, tied to a bureacratic software design method. And it wasn't even executable.
Re:Luna: Visual and textual functional programming language
by king_magic on Sunday February 21, 2016 @12:24PM
(#11145389)
And this feels like solving a non-problem as well, IMHO.
Re:Luna: Visual and textual functional programming language
by zby on Monday February 22, 2016 @03:34AM
(#11149411)
Yeah - this is a hard problem and the chances are small.
Nevertheless if you had 20+ years of experience in programming textual languages than it is no surprise that you understand them better than visual languages. That part of your argument does not seem valid.