[deleted]
Eve: Programming designed for humans
61–70 of 401 posts
Re: Eve: Programming designed for humans
#62How is this significantly different from something like Light Table? (edit: didn't realize it was build by the people who built Light Table). It feels like a rehash of that + Python notebooks, with a bit of Xcode's playground thrown in. Problem is that despite those tools being available, I literally never use them. Ever. Nor do I have a need for them. I kind of like the idea of being able to find bits of code in a l…
Agree completely, although I’m a little less excited about documenting code structure than the use of real-time feedback for code.
I’m a firm believer that minimizing the feedback-loop is directly correlated with productivity and code quality. Just taking the time to set up robust debugging tools (breakpoints, data inspection/manipulation) in my projects has given me more than one “wow you work fast” in my short career,
Re: Eve: Programming designed for humans
#63How is this significantly different from something like Light Table? (edit: didn't realize it was build by the people who built Light Table). It feels like a rehash of that + Python notebooks, with a bit of Xcode's playground thrown in. Problem is that despite those tools being available, I literally never use them. Ever. Nor do I have a need for them. I kind of like the idea of being able to find bits of code in a l…
That's fair. We don't talk about it in here because there was already way too much to discuss, but we've done a few non-trivial things in Eve. All of the inspector interactions are actually written in Eve [1], as is the program analyzer that provides the intelligence to make it work [2]. An important thing to keep in mind as well is that Eve does a lot with very little. 10kLoC of Eve would implement most systems twice over. So the programs will always be pretty short.
The intent is to handle anything you could imagine writing in python. As this is 0.2.0 of a language pretty unlike anything currently mainstream, we're nowhere near there, but with engineering there's no reason we can't be. The IDE is only one portion of the story here, the languge is another one. It's a variant of Datalog that has far reaching implications on how we can work in teams (global correctness), how software evolves (complete compositionality), and how we think about larger scale systems (orderless and distributed). The latter will be the highlight of our second milestone where we'll do another big release like this one, but for the rest we'll be doing deep dives over the next couple weeks about how we believe this language scales much better to the realities of software today.
More is coming. :)
[1]: https://github.com/witheve/Eve/blob/master/examples/editor.e... [2]: https://github.com/witheve/Eve/blob/master/examples/analyzer...
Re: Eve: Programming designed for humans
#64How is this significantly different from something like Light Table? (edit: didn't realize it was build by the people who built Light Table). It feels like a rehash of that + Python notebooks, with a bit of Xcode's playground thrown in. Problem is that despite those tools being available, I literally never use them. Ever. Nor do I have a need for them. I kind of like the idea of being able to find bits of code in a l…
Honestly I think this looks excellent for exposing children to programming.
I actually totally agree. Yes. Or even for teaching in high school/college.
Re: Eve: Programming designed for humans
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's plenty of meat in the blog post, on the Github etc. I suspect it's for "humans" because it's literate, functional programming with a REPL and a natural approach to how data is managed. It's a lot more than just a functional programming language. When did it become cool to make uninformed claims about how worthless other people's work is?
So if this is "programming for humans", all of us are just writing in some alien language because we're aliens? When did it become fashionable to call everybody else some variant of insane or delusioned and tout your own solution?
"for humans" doesn't imply that the rest are insane or delusional. It's the same context as "Wow Usain Bolt is not human".
Re: Eve: Programming designed for humans
#66> Sorry, but what about this is "designed for humans"? In the mind of the author it probably means 'Designed for reasonable humans and not those dirty nerds who write Haskell and shit.' Edit: Jesus, why the fuck is everyone getting triggered over this? HN has the most sensitive snowflakes out of any discussion forum.
A possible reason you were initially downvoted is that your interpretation doesn't seem terribly likely because the team gives off no air of looking down on anyone. Your edit sure won't help anything, the aggression is just uncalled for.
> Your edit sure won't help anything, the aggression is just uncalled for.
Ok bud, shall we call an emergency UN meeting to discuss my 'aggression'?
Re: Eve: Programming designed for humans
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's plenty of meat in the blog post, on the Github etc. I suspect it's for "humans" because it's literate, functional programming with a REPL and a natural approach to how data is managed. It's a lot more than just a functional programming language. When did it become cool to make uninformed claims about how worthless other people's work is?
So if this is "programming for humans", all of us are just writing in some alien language because we're aliens? When did it become fashionable to call everybody else some variant of insane or delusioned and tout your own solution?
Sorry, we're not trying to call you an alien, quite the contrary! We appreciate that you are a human, and we feel a lot of our tools aren't designed for people like you and me. Our argument is that even our best tools today are built with constraints imposed by the earliest computers (isolated, single core). We've moved past these limitations technically, but our ability to program to the best of our ability on these new, more capable machines (connected, multi-core) is hamstrung by restrictions still imposed by even the newest languages. Look at Swift, a brand new language that can only offer time-travel debugging in a special playground context.
What we're saying is that it's time to move past writing code for the consumption of the machine. If we want the power of computing (not necessarily programming as it exists today) to be more collaborative, and more inclusive; and to reach a wider, more diverse audience, then our tools need to start being designed for humans. Right now Eve is focusing on a table of contents, readable and relevant error messages, and clean, consistent, simple semantics. It's a modest start, but that's where we are. :)
So again, I'm very sorry we offended you, and I hope this explanation helps make our view clearer.
Re: Eve: Programming designed for humans
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
A possible reason you were initially downvoted is that your interpretation doesn't seem terribly likely because the team gives off no air of looking down on anyone. Your edit sure won't help anything, the aggression is just uncalled for.
> Your edit sure won't help anything, the aggression is just uncalled for. Ok bud, shall we call an emergency UN meeting to discuss my 'aggression'?
I'm far from taking it personally, so no need from my end.
What do you hope to accomplish with the antagonistic tone?
Re: Eve: Programming designed for humans
#69How is this significantly different from something like Light Table? (edit: didn't realize it was build by the people who built Light Table). It feels like a rehash of that + Python notebooks, with a bit of Xcode's playground thrown in. Problem is that despite those tools being available, I literally never use them. Ever. Nor do I have a need for them. I kind of like the idea of being able to find bits of code in a l…
Honestly I think this looks excellent for exposing children to programming.
Yeah, this kind of short feedback loop where mistakes are easy to find is perfect for a teaching environment.
iPython, tonicdev... and now this.
Re: Eve: Programming designed for humans
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow dude, you're really salty.
Skeptical is now salty? I fear for your bullshitometer. You should get it repaired.
>I'm sorry, but that doesn't give the connotation that it's "designed for humans". Perhaps if they could give a clear indication of what that means other than "it's in a word document", I'd be more inclined to look at it a little harder.
To be fair, this can easily be read as bitter. "I'm sorry, but", "Perhaps if they could ... I'd be more inclined to look" both come off that way.