[RexxLA] Code-Free (No-Code) Future and REXX Language

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[RexxLA] Code-Free (No-Code) Future and REXX Language

Haluk POLAT
Dear REXX Lover(s);

Nowadays, some application development softwares are available as GUI or BUI (Browser User Interface) programs on internet.

Some web sites support web based application development and their web hosting.

These programs include some built-in functions and class libraries as native component(s) in various programming language(s).

Is it possible that, can we develop no-code (code-free) applications in REXX, ooRexx, and NetRexx as REXX Lover(s)?

These applications must be include REXX, ooRexx and NetRexx functions and classes as pre-defined components.

In my opinion, perhaps, future of application development goes to no-code (code-free) approach methods and ways.

What do you think about future of code based programming and no-code (code-free) programming?

Please share and discuss this subject?

I glad to e-mail with you.


Sincerely...

--
Haluk POLAT (REXX Lover and progammer from Turkey)


_______________________________________________
rexxla-members mailing list -- mailto:[hidden email]
http://rexxla.org/mailman/listinfo/rexxla-members
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RexxLA] Code-Free (No-Code) Future and REXX Language

Rony G. Flatscher

Dear Haluk Polat,

"code-free programming" sounds quite contradicting. However it seems, that whatever sounds "new" sounds attractive and sometimes convincing.

The lady in your YouTube link is talking about combining modules and gluing them together *with* code! It does not matter whether you type out the code or use nifty GUI-interfaces (cf. <http://snap.berkeley.edu/>). The idea is not new at all and has been available for decades, where the popularity pops up for a few years and then everything gets deprecated by being "usual", "uninteresting", "boring" and eventually forgotten, just to have another or two further generations where these ideas re-appear as something "brand-new", "cool" and simply "the way of doing it"! What makes these concepts ultra-cool are usually great demos, where "Snap!" excels at (but beware, if students need to create such impressive demos, they would simply not be able to do so if they were not experts on the problem domains that get excercised).

In the end, if you need functionality, features that are not offered you need to dig deeply in the programming language(s) with which those modules got created to get the necessary functionality. In the case of "Snap!" it may be JavaScript or even Smalltalk, but also in WWW-programming (including HTML, JavaScript) and the like. (If a module is erroneous or short of new needed features and unmaintained, your company may have to re-create the applications over and over again.)

Anyway, it would be (and is) possible to use Rexx, NetRexx, ooRexx to create such modules that can be glued together. Scripting is usually "gluing" with text (programs) and Rexx makes it easy to learn and to apply! :) As such students can easily glue together the technologies to easily create e.g. complex GUI or WWW applications with astonishing little effort, if taught "correctly" how to take advantage of the "human centricness" of Rexx and by deduction NetRexx and ooRexx! :-)

Cheers,

---rony




On 10.01.2018 06:19, Haluk POLAT wrote:
Dear REXX Lover(s);

Nowadays, some application development softwares are available as GUI or BUI (Browser User Interface) programs on internet.

Some web sites support web based application development and their web hosting.

These programs include some built-in functions and class libraries as native component(s) in various programming language(s).

Is it possible that, can we develop no-code (code-free) applications in REXX, ooRexx, and NetRexx as REXX Lover(s)?

These applications must be include REXX, ooRexx and NetRexx functions and classes as pre-defined components.

In my opinion, perhaps, future of application development goes to no-code (code-free) approach methods and ways.

What do you think about future of code based programming and no-code (code-free) programming?

Please share and discuss this subject?

I glad to e-mail with you.


Sincerely...

--
Haluk POLAT (REXX Lover and progammer from Turkey)


_______________________________________________
rexxla-members mailing list -- mailto:[hidden email]
http://rexxla.org/mailman/listinfo/rexxla-members
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RexxLA] Code-Free (No-Code) Future and REXX Language

Chip Davis
Administrator
Greetings, Haluk!

I have to agree with Rony because I run into the problem of Snap!-type
application programming often.

Right now, I administer several websites where I would like to simply
remove the users' ability to change their password.  Unfortunately,
the site was created using one of those "build-it-yourself!" packages
that generates impenetrable HTML/XML/bloatcode.  The simplest mod is
impossible without access to the original meta-code from which the
site was created.

 From the other direction, I like to compare such "code-free
programming" tools to popular children's toys: in my day (middle of
last century) we had the Erector Set (Meccano in Europe) of metal
girders, brackets, pulleys, shafts, nuts, and bolts, with which we
could build any number of suggested toys from firetrucks to a
motorized robot.  More importantly, we could design and build our own
contraptions. (Mine usually resembled Rube Goldberg machines that
performed some trivial function in an unconventional way.)  It was a
perfect introduction to mechanical engineering, math, and physics, and
directly extensible into those adult domains.

The Erector Set is still available but it's a cheap imitation of the
post-war sets that I inherited and augmented.  Worse yet, they've
become "collectible", putting my childhood set well out of my budget.

These days, children work with Lego's.  While wildly popular (we never
had "ErectorSet Lands") the fundamental unit is the brick, which snaps
into other bricks.  While no doubt valuable for training future
masons, if you want to do anything other than build a structure, you
must have any number of specially-designed auxiliary pieces.  If your
imagination exceeds that of the designers (or your budget fails to)
you're out of luck.

The best comparison from my day was the Lincoln Logs set, with which
you could build a notched-log cabin or barn, but not much else.  Of
course, my electric train set had a Lincoln Log train station, but the
cargo-handling crane, drawbridge, and mechanical road crossing arms
were fabricated from the Erector set.

Now consider that ooRexx is the ultimate cross between the Erector Set
and Lego's:
  - It comes with a huge box of widgets that you simply "snap"
together with minimum effort.
  - Many widgets not supplied are readily available online.
  - Any widget you can't find can be easily created in Rexx.

Bottom line: IMHO, such "code-free" schemes might have value as a
learning tool (but probably not), and are woefully inadequate for
professional work.

-Chip-

On 1/10/2018 8:23 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:

> Dear Haluk Polat,
>
> "code-free programming" sounds quite contradicting. However it seems,
> that whatever sounds "new" sounds attractive and sometimes convincing.
>
> The lady in your YouTube link is talking about combining modules and
> gluing them together *with* code! It does not matter whether you type
> out the code or use nifty GUI-interfaces (cf.
> <http://snap.berkeley.edu/>). The idea is not new at all and has been
> available for decades, where the popularity pops up for a few years
> and then everything gets deprecated by being "usual", "uninteresting",
> "boring" and eventually forgotten, just to have another or two further
> generations where these ideas re-appear as something "brand-new",
> "cool" and simply "the way of doing it"! What makes these concepts
> ultra-cool are usually great demos, where "Snap!" excels at (but
> beware, if students need to create such impressive demos, they would
> simply not be able to do so if they were not experts on the problem
> domains that get excercised).
>
> In the end, if you need functionality, features that are not offered
> you need to dig deeply in the programming language(s) with which those
> modules got created to get the necessary functionality. In the case of
> "Snap!" it may be JavaScript or even Smalltalk, but also in
> WWW-programming (including HTML, JavaScript) and the like. (If a
> module is erroneous or short of new needed features and unmaintained,
> your company may have to re-create the applications over and over again.)
>
> Anyway, it would be (and is) possible to use Rexx, NetRexx, ooRexx to
> create such modules that can be glued together. Scripting is usually
> "gluing" with text (programs) and Rexx makes it easy to learn and to
> apply! :) As such students can easily glue together the technologies
> to easily create e.g. complex GUI or WWW applications with astonishing
> little effort, if taught "correctly" how to take advantage of the
> "human centricness" of Rexx and by deduction NetRexx and ooRexx! :-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> ---rony
>
>
>
>
> On 10.01.2018 06:19, Haluk POLAT wrote:
>> Dear *REXX* Lover(s);
>>
>> Nowadays, some application development softwares are available as
>> *GUI* or *BUI* (*B*rowser *U*ser *I*nterface) programs on internet.
>>
>> Some web sites support web based application development and their
>> web hosting.
>>
>> These programs include some built-in functions and class libraries
>> as native component(s) in various programming language(s).
>>
>> Is it possible that, can we develop *no-code* (*code-free*)
>> applications in *REXX*, *ooRexx*, and *NetRexx* as *REXX* Lover(s)?
>>
>> These applications must be include *REXX*, *ooRexx* and *NetRexx*
>> functions and classes as pre-defined components.
>>
>> In my opinion, perhaps, future of application development goes to
>> *no-code* (*code-free*) approach methods and ways.
>>
>> What do you think about future of code based programming and
>> *no-code* (*code-free*) programming?
>>
>> Please share and discuss this subject?
>>
>> I glad to e-mail with you.
>>
>> Please visit this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1X9M5Idqfo
>>
>> Sincerely...
>>
>> --
>> Haluk POLAT (REXX Lover and progammer from Turkey)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rexxla-members mailing list -- mailto:[hidden email]
> http://rexxla.org/mailman/listinfo/rexxla-members
>
_______________________________________________
rexxla-members mailing list -- mailto:[hidden email]
http://rexxla.org/mailman/listinfo/rexxla-members