/poll "Do you think the future of programming is" ...
# thinking-together
m
/poll "Do you think the future of programming is" "Visual" "Textual" "Other (specify in comments)"
j
t
šŸ‘ 1
However, I also believe that the way we create (edit) software must be distinct from the way we understand (read) it.
j
ā€œCode conflates engineering and authorshipā€ I think Mr Victor said something along those lines onceā€¦
m
What role do type systems play on physical programming?
j
@Mariano Guerra good question. Should your ā€˜tangiblesā€™ system allow you to scratch your back with a pen, or should that be a type error? šŸ˜› I like this paper for discussing the difficulties of integrating tacit real world knowledge and computational affordances: https://www.uni-weimar.de/fileadmin/user/fak/medien/professuren/Human-Computer_Interaction/Downloads/Papers_2012/BeyondAffordance-small.pdf
A prevalent assumption behind interface approaches that employ physical means of interaction is that this leverages usersā€™ prior knowledge from the real world. This paper scrutinizes the assumption that this knowledge can be seamlessly transferred to computer-augmented situations.
The affordances of physical objects are potentially endless and users creatively select those that fit their understanding of the system, their aims and the situation. Designersā€™ capability to design affordances ā€˜intoā€™ objects, let alone restrict them to desired ones is thus limited.
d
Yeah I replied 'Other' cos it's not a very useful question: there'll be both visual and textual aspects
also don't forget kinesthetic, auditory..
what if you're blind?
m
will someone work on that? the current afairs regarding a11y don't give me a lot of hope there šŸ˜•
s
I agree with tangible and tactile, another relevant resource (http://worrydream.com/ABriefRantOnTheFutureOfInteractionDesign/)
šŸ‘ 1
Long-term I think a lot of programming will be declarative. Give a tool a set of constraints\heuristics or data (curated examples) and have it generate a program for you. The way to define data might be the visual part of the language.
i
I think it'll be a combination of textual and visual - where visual is meant more of a "visualization", could just as well be tactile or similar. Even now most of coding is a combination of visual and structural (almost always represented as visual) - the code is text, and the file system is structural. I don't think we'll be getting rid of text in code anytime soon. I don't think we should. Perhaps eventually, yes, since what text in code does is describe structures of logic - but right now text markup is a powerful interface for doing that. It would require coming up with a similarly powerful representation that allows for similarly powerful manipulation of the structure. (When I talk about powerful, I mean how accessible it is for human thought, in addition to how fast it is for humans to manipulate.) The far future of coding might not be textual, though. And I think there will be growing amount of visual assistance for the structure of code, and the text-based parts of code will reduce to smaller fragments while the structure takes more priority.
So I'd say we'll be exploring the structure of a code in VR or such, while still writing basic logic interactions within it as text instead of connecting blocks or using visual structure of any sort for that.
šŸ‘ 1