🚀 go-pugleaf

In <15l2tiINNkec@agate.berkeley.edu> bh@anarres.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Brian Harvey) writes:

>By the way, I'm skeptical about "visual programming" if you mean something
>along the lines of Pinball Construction Kit or Hypercard.  I think that
>that sort of thing achieves slickness at the expense of intellectual depth.
>That sounds pretty abstract; I guess I mean that you don't learn to think
>like a hacker (like a problem-solver, if you prefer) from pushing icons
>around.

This sure sounds like bait...  so I'l bite.   

How is using objective/visual programing aids to producing desired computer
programs any different from using calculators/computers in producing
mathematical results?  The objective/visual model insulates the 
programmer from the tedious details of naming and initializing indexes for 
loops, inserting loop tests, handling obscure sintax, etc.  In the same way
with calculators you seek to alivieate the drudgery of 
the bookeeping inherent in mathematical calculation.  Is the drudgery of
computer language syntax is intelectualy deep?  


>That's a lot of loose threads to contribute to your desired discussion!
>I'm not sure where they all lead to but maybe other people will continue
>some of them.

I hope this is not taking us off topic.

Guy
gthomas@unixg.ubc.ca