Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nomnoml

nomnoml.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 165 posts

Re: Nomnoml

#151

Post by cdchn »

jldugger wrote: post #143
cdchn wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I want a parsable structure I can feed into grafana or similar, so I can decorate the graph with metric data. I don't think this can do it, but it would be cool if it could. Maybe someone can make another diagramming DSL for the Grafana Node Panel.

Well, right now I have graphviz dot which should be enough to load in and transform as needed into whatever DSL desired.

I don't think anything that I'm aware of converts graphviz dot files into Grafana Node Panels but it would be a good project if someone did it.

Re: Nomnoml

#152

Post by eru »

tannhaeuser wrote: post #119
layer8 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a pity, because one benefit of UML would be that everyone speaks the same language. Before UML, there were many different modeling notations [0], and the goal with UML was to create a single interoperable unified language. This was successful insofar as it displaced the previous object modeling languages. However, it would be nice to have that benefit of a modeling lingua franca not only in modeling tools, but f…

UML sucked so much, it took OOP down the drain along with it. Unfortunately, UML also had to contaminate nascent BPM modeling, by making BPMN a fscking "profile" of UML. I'll never forget the look of once motivated process modelers when they learned they need "stereotypes" and such - the result of their modeling was more like a psychoanalysis and beyond useless. Ever had to deal with RMI, EMF, MOF, and UML's weird an…

OOP was never a good idea (apart maybe for GUIs), UML or not.

What's BPM?

Re: Nomnoml

#153

Post by eru »

IshKebab wrote: post #144
eru wrote: post #16

This was very confusing, until I found the 'about' button. I guess I'm leading a charmed life, because I can not recognise UML on sight? (I thought at first this was describing a grammar of fake pirate language or something.)

The way to recognise UML is by the wide variety of arrow styles that nobody can remember. I'm 90% sure that's the main reason it didn't catch on. You have to learn UML because of the stupid arrows. Compare it to something like this which acknowledges the fact that nobody is going to casually memorise 10 different styles of arrow just to read occasional UML diagrams: https://buck2.build/docs/concepts/concept_map/ Much…

Different arrows are useful to express different relationships. But perhaps you should just put a legend next to each diagram, or use words to annotate your arrows?

Re: Nomnoml

#154

Post by totetsu »

withinboredom wrote: post #111
totetsu wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got quite far asking an LLM to type it out for me. and I got some nice diagrams to visualize the project I was thinking about.

I decided to ask the bing bot to type one out for me, and it told me "no". When I asked it why, it told me it was because it wasn't "creative" so it wrote me a poem in Python. I then asked it to write a diagram that was funny. It told me "no" because it wouldn't be creative. :sigh: technology.

Try chat gpt and set the system prompt to say that it is creative, or you can run lama on replicate

Re: Nomnoml

#155

Post by deepsun »

jiehong wrote: post #13

Looks nice, and much nicer from plantuml class diagrams [0]. [0]: https://plantuml.com/class-diagram

PlantUML supports one of my most-used diagram: Sequence. nomnoml doesn't, unfortunately.

Re: Nomnoml

#156

Post by Qwertious »

eru wrote: post #152
tannhaeuser wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UML sucked so much, it took OOP down the drain along with it. Unfortunately, UML also had to contaminate nascent BPM modeling, by making BPMN a fscking "profile" of UML. I'll never forget the look of once motivated process modelers when they learned they need "stereotypes" and such - the result of their modeling was more like a psychoanalysis and beyond useless. Ever had to deal with RMI, EMF, MOF, and UML's weird an…

OOP was never a good idea (apart maybe for GUIs), UML or not. What's BPM?

Business Process Modeling, according to wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_process_modeling

Re: Nomnoml

#157

Post by agileAlligator »

Pxtl wrote: post #120
agileAlligator wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best of both worlds would be a text-based tool to hold the semantics of your graph, and then a drag&drop interface to fix the layout. Exactly this, I wonder why no one has come up with it yet. Maybe you could embed the layout details like coordinates of elements inside the markup in a separate section?

I've seen tools that work like this - Microsoft's earlier kicks at entity framework tried to do it for SQL table block diagrams. They would constantly get out-of-sync as merges happened and were generally a pain to manage. I'd rather a tool just let me give it hints of "this is an important block put it somewhere high visibility" and "this is semantically the root of a tree" and stuff like that, then just focus on ha…

The issue with graph engines that manage the layout themselves is that it becomes very messy the higher the number of nodes you have. I've experienced this with Mermaid.js and Obsidian.

Re: Nomnoml

#158

Post by Etherlord87 »

IshKebab wrote: post #144
eru wrote: post #16

This was very confusing, until I found the 'about' button. I guess I'm leading a charmed life, because I can not recognise UML on sight? (I thought at first this was describing a grammar of fake pirate language or something.)

The way to recognise UML is by the wide variety of arrow styles that nobody can remember. I'm 90% sure that's the main reason it didn't catch on. You have to learn UML because of the stupid arrows. Compare it to something like this which acknowledges the fact that nobody is going to casually memorise 10 different styles of arrow just to read occasional UML diagrams: https://buck2.build/docs/concepts/concept_map/ Much…

No one forces you to use all possible arrows, you can learn just one, and use that.

When reading a diagram, ideally you would read it by looking at the generated diagram, not text, as that's the entire point, but even when reading the raw text, it's apparent where the arrows are, based on "less than" and "greater than" characters, no?

Re: Nomnoml

#159

Post by tut-urut-utut »

tannhaeuser wrote: post #119
layer8 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a pity, because one benefit of UML would be that everyone speaks the same language. Before UML, there were many different modeling notations [0], and the goal with UML was to create a single interoperable unified language. This was successful insofar as it displaced the previous object modeling languages. However, it would be nice to have that benefit of a modeling lingua franca not only in modeling tools, but f…

UML sucked so much, it took OOP down the drain along with it. Unfortunately, UML also had to contaminate nascent BPM modeling, by making BPMN a fscking "profile" of UML. I'll never forget the look of once motivated process modelers when they learned they need "stereotypes" and such - the result of their modeling was more like a psychoanalysis and beyond useless. Ever had to deal with RMI, EMF, MOF, and UML's weird an…

So true, but had to downvote because of „fscking“.

Re: Nomnoml

#160

Post by Pxtl »

agileAlligator wrote: post #157
Pxtl wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen tools that work like this - Microsoft's earlier kicks at entity framework tried to do it for SQL table block diagrams. They would constantly get out-of-sync as merges happened and were generally a pain to manage. I'd rather a tool just let me give it hints of "this is an important block put it somewhere high visibility" and "this is semantically the root of a tree" and stuff like that, then just focus on ha…

The issue with graph engines that manage the layout themselves is that it becomes very messy the higher the number of nodes you have. I've experienced this with Mermaid.js and Obsidian.

Still, I'd rather have textual hints about layout than explicit drag-and-drop. Stuff like "boxes a1, a2, a3 should be presented sequentially" or "box b1, b2, b3 are tightly related and should be presented close to each other" and "box c is the root of its tree" and stuff like that.
Post reply on HN