Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #9378

Re: Source code representation (was: code generation for the ternary operator).

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 23:52:26 -0700, Roedy Green
<see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:

>On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 09:41:00 -0700, Daniel Pitts
><newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> wrote, quoted or indirectly
>quoted someone who said :
>
>>
>>In other words, you have the language constructs (classes, methods, 
>>fields, statements, aspects, loops, etc...) modeled, and then have view 
>>in front of that model which make them "look" like something that can be 
>>manipulated easily by the programmer.
>
>I have been pushing the SCID idea for decades. There has been very
>strong resistance to it. I think it is based on the following:
>
>1. I talk about all the wild an crazy things you COULD do with code
>display it if were pre-parsed into a tree.  Most of these things
>remind people of the clownish decor in a McDonald's restaurant.  They
>imagine garish colours, dancing paperclips, animated icons...  And run
>in horror.  They don't get in that what I am about is CUSTOMISATION,
>so you can have the display EXACTLY the way YOU like it, completely
>independent of what other people like.  None of this would be
>mandatory.  They look at my prototype JDisplay listings and recoil at
>the garishness. http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jdisplay.html

     What would it take to implement such?  If it is much effort at
all, it gets in the way or is difficult to justify.  Writing a
text-processing utility is simpler.

>2. People have SCID-like tools that just got in the way of editing.

     Yes.  I have utilties that process text files.  I would like to
be able to use them on source code without having to jump through a
hoop.

>3. People like the security of text files.  Database have a habit of
>losing everything, perhaps with software is discontinued, OSes
>changes.

     I would say "simplicity" instead of "security", but it is about
the same argument.  Text files convert to other systems fairly easily,
too, but SCID between two SCID systems might not.

>4. Experienced programmers think of programming as manipulating text.
>They have to be weaned to think more of thinking of programming as
>more like plumbing where you interconnect names.  Eventually editing
>will be much more visual where you select methods, drag variables into
>place, and do a lot of selecting from a list of what the SCID
>considers most plausible.

     Typing is much faster than mousing for me.  The text interface is
also simpler.  I can use my own editor that fits my preferences rather
than getting locked into a GUI IDE.

>I have been pitching some of these ideas to IntelliJ.  I am using the
>notion of almost-subliminal differences in the way text is rendered to
>give additional information about each symbol without having to look
>back at the definition.  Given that you are not supposed to even
>notice the difference perhaps contrarians will then argue for more
>distinctive warping.

     I tend to find such things distracting and prefer to not have
them.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

code generation for the ternary operator Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-10-28 06:46 -0700
  Re: code generation for the ternary operator Jaap Droogers <JaapDroogers@unusable.meel.homelinux.net> - 2011-10-28 16:07 +0200
    Re: code generation for the ternary operator markspace <-@.> - 2011-10-28 08:32 -0700
      Re: code generation for the ternary operator Owen Jacobson <angrybaldguy@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 01:53 -0400
        Re: code generation for the ternary operator Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-11-01 06:25 -0700
          Source code representation (was: code generation for the ternary operator). Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2011-11-01 09:41 -0700
            Re: Source code representation Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-11-01 13:46 -0700
              Re: Source code representation Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2011-11-01 16:09 -0700
              Re: Source code representation Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-11-01 23:54 -0700
            Re: Source code representation (was: code generation for the ternary operator). Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-11-01 17:33 -0700
              Re: Source code representation (was: code generation for the ternary operator). Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-11-02 01:19 -0700
                Re: Source code representation (was: code generation for the ternary operator). Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-11-02 09:42 -0700
              Re: Source code representation (was: code generation for the ternary operator). Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 07:45 -0700
              Re: Source code representation Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2011-11-02 10:58 -0700
                Re: Source code representation Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-11-02 14:11 -0700
                Re: Source code representation Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2011-11-02 15:21 -0700
                Re: Source code representation Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-11-02 16:07 -0700
            Re: Source code representation (was: code generation for the ternary operator). Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-11-01 23:52 -0700
              Re: Source code representation (was: code generation for the ternary operator). Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-11-02 09:47 -0700
                Re: Source code representation (was: code generation for the ternary operator). Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-11-02 20:58 +0000
                Re: Source code representation Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2011-11-02 15:27 -0700
                Re: Source code representation Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-11-02 23:18 +0000
                Re: Source code representation Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 17:30 -0700
                Re: Source code representation Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2011-11-02 15:30 -0700
                Re: Source code representation Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-11-02 21:30 -0700
                Re: Source code representation Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 22:07 -0700
            Re: Source code representation Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-05 21:01 -0400
      Re: code generation for the ternary operator Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-05 20:56 -0400
    Re: code generation for the ternary operator rossum <rossum48@coldmail.com> - 2011-10-29 13:01 +0100
    Re: code generation for the ternary operator Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-29 10:46 -0700
  Re: code generation for the ternary operator Henk van Voorthuijsen <voorth@xs4all.nl> - 2011-10-28 08:05 -0700
    Re: code generation for the ternary operator Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-10-28 15:41 +0000
  Re: code generation for the ternary operator Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2011-10-28 10:31 -0700
    Re: code generation for the ternary operator Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-10-29 03:24 +0200
  Re: code generation for the ternary operator Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2011-10-29 00:23 +0200
    Re: code generation for the ternary operator Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-29 10:50 -0700
      Re: code generation for the ternary operator Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2011-11-01 13:36 +0100
  Re: code generation for the ternary operator Michal Kleczek <kleku@poczta.onet.pl> - 2011-10-31 17:38 +0100

csiph-web