This is exactly why I think there is an advantage to operating directly on parse trees especially if the parse trees include comment nodes. It should be possible to operate on them directly with both syntax directed editors and "graphical" programming systems thus providing for such bi-directional translation.
Jerome E. Garcia Adventurous Mind
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: RE: Morphic, dataflow and encapsulation Author: "Jarvis; Robert P." Jarvisb@timken.com at INTERNET Date: 1/27/99 7:49 PM
In order to be more useful I think a "graphical" programming system must provide bi-directional translation to/from code. Perhaps not from arbitrary code (i.e. given some hand-written UI code it shouldn't be expected or required to generate diagrams), but at least the machine-generated code should be "translatable" back to diagrams.
Bob Jarvis The Timken Company
-----Original Message----- From: Adam Bridge [SMTP:abridge@dcn.davis.ca.us] Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 1999 2:15 PM To: swart@home.com; squeak@cs.uiuc.edu Subject: RE: Morphic, dataflow and encapsulation
My problem with graphical programming systems (and here I'm thinking about a few very different entities: Prograph is the extreme case, HyperCard and Interface Builder for Apple's Yellow Box are more typical ones) is their failure to produce documentation for what's there or they hide what's going on by requiring many different windows to be open.
< good stuff deleted >
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org