What's any of that got to do with my question? That problem (and it's solution) can happen just as easily whether the UI is constructed interactively in a GUI IDE or produced solely with code.
Well lets see, I've created a compiler, then as part of a team created a commercial OS, and a games console emulator too. All of them would have benefitted from better tools to visualise what was going on under the hood during development.
But of course that doesn't make me a Scotsman in your eyes?
It's funny, I'd expect a self-professed programming expert such as yourself to be more aware of logical fallacies.
Of course Android has API for it. But that doesn't get around the fact that every graphics chip has different capabilities and different limitations in what it can actually do.
It's hardly unique, PC games get bugs on some graphics cards and not others, and due to differences in performance, some will have to have certain graphics effects turned off, etc. So PC games developers have to have a bunch of different graphics cards too for customising, testing and debugging, even though they're using DirectX or OpenGL. And sure enough PC game development is expensive.
iOS devices change graphics chip too, but you're talking one change per year. Not the 100+ variations per year of Android. It's far closer to programming for the fixed spec of a console.
The explanation isn't hard. It's a graphical game. It uses custom shaders, as more advanced graphical games do these days. Those shaders don't with the same on different graphic chips. Android devices have a variety of different graphics chips in them. Other games programmers DO have the same issues with Android.
$thousands != hundreds of test devices. Buying unlocked, as one needs to do for test devices (one can't support a contract for every test device.) Half a dozen devices is already in the realm of $thousands.
The platform is succeeding somehow, and I've gone into that elsewhere - its off topic here. But it certainly hasn't been succeeding on the strength of it's games portfolio.
I'm sorry, but even the one who posted the video says there isn't any interesting content until 18 minutes in.
No it doesn't say that. You're convoluting a comment about it having a slow start with one pointing past the first two graphical programming demos to a binary search demo. All the demos are interesting.
I am NOT going to sit through 18 minutes of tripe to get to something that sounds like it's been done a dozen times before, just repackaged, renamed, refactored, and presented as some yahoo's "new" idea because he changed a couple keywords and ignored history.
Prejudice: "An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts"
You're welcome to your opinions. But they are prejudice, and therefore worthless.
Question, did IDEs with interactive UI constructors make UIs quicker/higher quality to build?
I'm not suggesting designing with them. That's a job for a designer. I'm saying given a wireframe design does such a tool enable getting the UI part of an application done quicker/better?
Here's a prediction. The software you work on is very, very, very boring. Kernel, embedded, industrial, banking back office, something like that. Am I close?
It's "you morons", not "your morons and", and a sentence starts with a capital letter. What's the matter, didn't you know what the sentence was going to be before you wrote it?
That should never be necessary because you should know your goal before you start.
That's fine if you're building YATTBBB (yet another thing that's been built before). If you're creating something new, perfect plans ahead of time aren't always possible.
I must say I'd hate to be in your uncreative world.
It is the most worthless, dumbass thing I've ever had to sit through.
There are some people that are visionaries, there are some people who can't see anything ever being different from how they are now. He's the former, you're the latter.
People like him invented GUIs. If people like you were in sole control we'd still have to do everything via modal text interfaces.
However the infinite loop example was found because he *knew* what he was doing as he intentionally miswrote it to start with and intentionally changed the inputs in accordance with this knowledge.
It's was a demo. Demos by their nature tend to be both simplistic contrived.
He was putting across a principle in the first half of his talk and a way of life in the second. Both very valid.
From your comments it's clear that you're more of a craftsman than a visionary. There's room in the world for both.
And that last group is where 99% of the awful programs in the world come from. They've scratched their itch, but they've left their scaly scabs hanging around messing the place up for everyone else.
Slashdot Mirror
You're is the view of another person with prejudiced opinions. You also haven't watched the video. And thus your comment is equally worthless.
What's any of that got to do with my question? That problem (and it's solution) can happen just as easily whether the UI is constructed interactively in a GUI IDE or produced solely with code.
Yes you do need a video for it. It would not be conveyed by static text and diagrams.
It's amazing how many people are proud to be closed minded. Too bad you missed out. I'm glad I didn't.
Well lets see, I've created a compiler, then as part of a team created a commercial OS, and a games console emulator too. All of them would have benefitted from better tools to visualise what was going on under the hood during development.
But of course that doesn't make me a Scotsman in your eyes?
It's funny, I'd expect a self-professed programming expert such as yourself to be more aware of logical fallacies.
Of course Android has API for it. But that doesn't get around the fact that every graphics chip has different capabilities and different limitations in what it can actually do.
It's hardly unique, PC games get bugs on some graphics cards and not others, and due to differences in performance, some will have to have certain graphics effects turned off, etc. So PC games developers have to have a bunch of different graphics cards too for customising, testing and debugging, even though they're using DirectX or OpenGL. And sure enough PC game development is expensive.
iOS devices change graphics chip too, but you're talking one change per year. Not the 100+ variations per year of Android. It's far closer to programming for the fixed spec of a console.
The explanation isn't hard. It's a graphical game. It uses custom shaders, as more advanced graphical games do these days. Those shaders don't with the same on different graphic chips. Android devices have a variety of different graphics chips in them. Other games programmers DO have the same issues with Android.
$thousands != hundreds of test devices.
Buying unlocked, as one needs to do for test devices (one can't support a contract for every test device.) Half a dozen devices is already in the realm of $thousands.
The platform is succeeding somehow, and I've gone into that elsewhere - its off topic here. But it certainly hasn't been succeeding on the strength of it's games portfolio.
I'm sorry, but even the one who posted the video says there isn't any interesting content until 18 minutes in.
No it doesn't say that. You're convoluting a comment about it having a slow start with one pointing past the first two graphical programming demos to a binary search demo. All the demos are interesting.
I am NOT going to sit through 18 minutes of tripe to get to something that sounds like it's been done a dozen times before, just repackaged, renamed, refactored, and presented as some yahoo's "new" idea because he changed a couple keywords and ignored history.
Prejudice: "An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts"
You're welcome to your opinions. But they are prejudice, and therefore worthless.
You didn't watch the video. It's not about removing coding. It's about getting instant feedback on what's being coded.
Well actually it's about much bigger issues than that, but that's the heart of it.
Congratulations, you're the first commenter that gets it. Mind you most of the commenters didn't bother to watch the video in the first place.
Question, did IDEs with interactive UI constructors make UIs quicker/higher quality to build?
I'm not suggesting designing with them. That's a job for a designer. I'm saying given a wireframe design does such a tool enable getting the UI part of an application done quicker/better?
I can't even bring myself to watch this
Then you don't know what it's about.
Here's a prediction. The software you work on is very, very, very boring. Kernel, embedded, industrial, banking back office, something like that. Am I close?
It's "you morons", not "your morons and", and a sentence starts with a capital letter. What's the matter, didn't you know what the sentence was going to be before you wrote it?
That should never be necessary because you should know your goal before you start.
That's fine if you're building YATTBBB (yet another thing that's been built before). If you're creating something new, perfect plans ahead of time aren't always possible.
I must say I'd hate to be in your uncreative world.
Cathedral thinking.
It is the most worthless, dumbass thing I've ever had to sit through.
There are some people that are visionaries, there are some people who can't see anything ever being different from how they are now. He's the former, you're the latter.
People like him invented GUIs. If people like you were in sole control we'd still have to do everything via modal text interfaces.
Don't try to attach a stupid fraud if yourself to people who actually accomplished something. They all agree with me.
I don't agree with you. But then I suppose that means I'm no true Scotsman.
It's worth a hour. But if you don't want to watch it fine. Just don't expect your comments to be worth anything if you haven't done your homework.
Until someone actually creates this new mythical language that is proposed by Bret
Bret didn't propose a new mythical language. He presents a principle and he describes a possible way of life.
The principle is applicable to an IDE for any language, and indeed to any tool for creation, not necessarily programming.
So what exactly is he talking about that's "new"?
If you watch the video you'll find out.
You need to watch the video. The horizons of his thinking couldn't be wider.
However the infinite loop example was found because he *knew* what he was doing as he intentionally miswrote it to start with and intentionally changed the inputs in accordance with this knowledge.
It's was a demo. Demos by their nature tend to be both simplistic contrived.
He was putting across a principle in the first half of his talk and a way of life in the second. Both very valid.
From your comments it's clear that you're more of a craftsman than a visionary. There's room in the world for both.
And that last group is where 99% of the awful programs in the world come from. They've scratched their itch, but they've left their scaly scabs hanging around messing the place up for everyone else.
As I said.