Talk:Visual programming language
- Visual programming language (VPL) is any programming language that lets users specify programs in a two-(or more)-dimensional way. Conventional textual languages are not considered two-dimensional since the compiler or interpreter processes them as one-dimensional streams of characters.
Would this imply that Befunge is a VPL? I wouldn't say it is, but I don't know enough about VPLs to either revise the introduction or add it to the list of languages. Eighty 11:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Self?
I can't see how Self is visual in any way. It just seems to be another textual language. Can anybody explain why it is here? grlea 02:11, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Automator
Does Automator count as a VPL? It is clearly a visual scripting paradigm, but it is technically one dimensional as each node has 0..1 inputs and 0..1 outputs. Common sense says that Automator is a VPL, but the 2 dimensional requirement seems to exclude it. Therefore I would suggest a more direct definition of VPL, being "any programming language that lets users specify programs by manipulating program elements graphically rather than by specifying them textually."Harperska 23:09, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think that that particular definition of dimensionality has any bearing on Automator's admissibility; it's clearly a visual (as opposed to textual) medium. --Piet Delport 00:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- As Automator is clearly a visual language, and it is questionable whether befunge is (I would argue no), I am changing the definition to the one I proposed, and adding Automator to the list. Harperska 05:19, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Portability/Source code?
Hi readers.
Does anyone of these offer finished diagrams [C/C++, Pascal, etc] source code export for application portability?
Thanks for any help.
Bye, Ivano.
Portability of text is not a given. See ASCII, ANSII, Unicode, word. So it is not the fault of the visibility, if it is not portable.
In Unix most files (even nontext) are stored as a text file with ASCII codes 0..127 and therefore are portable.Arnero 18:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
List of software
This article, like many of its type, has accumulated a ridiculously long list of software. It should be an article about Visual programming languages, definitely not a list of them, and certainly not a list of non-notable packages. For starters, I am removing those items from the list which do not have an article on Wikipedia - if they're not notable enough for that, they aren't notable enough to be mentioned here. I still don't think that's going far enough, but it's a start. Comments/disagreements welcome. CiaranG 16:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)