Re: Scripting System..

From: Brian (
Date: 12/03/02

Patrick Dughi wrote:
> > This leads to an alternate theory about why a visual programming system,
> > like the one you propose, is a winning idea (and has been every time some
> > smart person has hit upon the idea): it's not because it removes the
> > burden of syntax from the user -- that only saves some tedium -- but
> > because it allows the neophyte to visualize (or, better, be shown) the
> > structure and flow of the program in a simple, high-level way.  I imagine
> > that once trained on such a system, the user would be quite capable of
> > picking up a reasonable language's syntax in a few days and be just as
> > competent a programmer.
> >
>         Actually that was my goal - the underlying language doesn't really
> have to be anything special, it just has to have all the basic components
> made in such a way to be easy to string together in that afforementioned
> visual style.  The visual modeler will be responsible for translating flow
> charts (or whatever) into actual code.

Not to be a salesman or anything, but an interpretter from visual to
code doesn't have to exist, as exhibited by 'G'.  Since the visual
elements are already represented internally in some kind of data
structure, the program (MUD) can interpret that data structure
directly.  G, the programming language inside of LabView
(, does exactly this.  This way, the same
graph or tree used in the development tool can be output from and read
into the same data structure for both the building and the running on
the MUD.  [Yeah for code reuse.]

Having been forced to learn G to a certain degree for my classes, this
is a subject near to my heart.  Myself, I find it cludgy and cryptic in
its own fashion, but perhaps I'm biased by such things by years of time
playing with C.

   | FAQ: |
   | Archives: |
   | Newbie List:   |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 06/25/03 PDT