From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,936b98ceff0d9f3e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-02-08 10:31:20 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!news.xtra.co.nz!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: "AG" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: Subject: Re: One language environment don't have future X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 07:38:12 +1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: 219.88.60.112 X-Complaints-To: newsadmin@xtra.co.nz X-Trace: news.xtra.co.nz 1044729080 219.88.60.112 (Sun, 09 Feb 2003 07:31:20 NZDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 07:31:20 NZDT Organization: Xtra Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:33916 Date: 2003-02-09T07:38:12+13:00 List-Id: "Kevin Cline" wrote in message news:ba162549.0302061237.919b409@posting.google.com... > Karel Miklav wrote in message news:... > > Stephen Leake wrote: > > > UML is just another "computer tongues". It's partly graphical, but > > > that's not really such a big deal! > > > > The IT tower of Babel may never be built, but UML and tools around it > > are a step forward. > > The software development community seems to disagree. > After many years on the market, graphical programming systems > are still not widely used. And not surprisingly. Compare it with normal languages: Historically, they seem to have migrated from pictorials to hieroglyphics to alphabet and plain text. The reason? Well, more flexibility, generality and more expressive power. Try to come up with a picture for the previous sentence for example ... For some reason, computerese seems to be going in exactly the opposite way - having started with a sort of literate language it now drifts more and more towards simple [not to say stupid] pictures. [...] > Well, considering that most of the information in books is currently > textual, and has been for many centuries, it seems unlikely that > pictorial representations of program logic will prove superior > within our lifetimes. Also, attempts to do that have been made decades ago: Block diagrams anyone? I'm still waiting for a compiler or IDE to draw that diagram and have the code generated which would be equivalent to say a few hundred classes written in text [well, I'm not - sarcasm y'know]