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

Eve Version 0

chris-granger.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 195 posts

Re: Eve Version 0

#81

Post by ModernMech »

toby wrote: post #37
danso wrote: post #35

> In order to accomplish that, we do need a way to describe processes. We need a way to "program." But switching the goal from building applications to analyzing and communicating information changes everything. Our current programming tools are awful thinking tools. Instead, they were designed to build complex systems. How much effort does it take to write a program to scan through your facebook friends and check to…

Agree -- if Facebook had an "export my friend list to Excel" button, then plenty of non-programmers could perform this task using existing tools. I read the tutorial and I am sort of struggling to see what benefit this would give someone who was already an Excel power-user.

Excel is a very powerful tool, but it reaches a utility plateau very quickly when you start going outside its intended purpose of being a spreadsheet application. You're correct that a power-user can do pretty much anything in Excel, but when you start talking about actual database operations (like Join), state, and UI, then you're at the point where the tool is working against you.

Re: Eve Version 0

#82

Post by gcv »

mkozlows wrote: post #44
dgreensp wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the opposite message, which is that programming tools and the process of programming are so bad, it's hard to get a computer to do a simple task for you without tearing your hair out, never mind building a UI. A better IDE (basically a better text editor) doesn't even scratch the surface.

The thing is, it's easy to say something is hard. Programming is definitely hard! The question is: Is it hard essentially, or is it hard accidentally? That is, can you remove unnecessary complexity from programming and suddenly it'll become easy? That was the proposition behind first LightTable, and then Eve as originally conceived. But neither of them really found a satisfying answer, a way to say "hey, for making y…

> Is it hard essentially, or is it hard accidentally?

Not exactly either, but certainly a bit of both. Programming is hard primarily because it is so poorly understood. The entire field is in its infancy. Comparing it to art, I'm pretty sure we haven't even reached the "stick figures scrawled on a cave wall" stage yet. As Alan Kay pointed out we sure didn't invent an arch yet: http://squab.no-ip.com/collab/uploads/61/IsSoftwareEngineeri...

It's nice to see the Eve team trying to do something at least slightly different from the same-old, same-old. Even if it looks a lot like some horrors of yore (FoxPro) when I squint.

Re: Eve Version 0

#83

Post by jamii »

biot wrote: post #62
jamii wrote: post #50

The change of focus is perhaps hard to understand without more context. Basically, there are two really different modes of programming: Most of what we see on HN is about building applications, servers, websites etc. Big, monolithic things that take weeks to years and are deployed to somewhere else and used by lots of people. Most programming tools are built for this kind of work, where the time between writing the c…

Was there a problem inherent to building large applications that you found intractible, or is the shift solely due to focusing on entry-level accessibility?

We built a Foursquare clone recently and the BOOM guys built an extended version of HDFS and Hadoop (http://db.cs.berkeley.edu/papers/eurosys10-boom.pdf). It works out pretty well. The shift is not really about accessibility either - I've watched people do some pretty advanced data work in fields like physics and biology.

It's more about making computers into personal tools. If you look at the tools the average person uses - email, excel, google etc - they all work really well individually but they are really hard to extend or compose. Each application is a world unto itself and doesn't play with the outside world. What would really help people work is not the ability to build their own applications but the ability to move data around and glue tools together. It's kind of like applying the unix philosophy to office suites.

Chiusano has a pretty interesting take on this - http://pchiusano.github.io/2013-05-22/future-of-software.htm...

Re: Eve Version 0

#84

Post by rgoddard »

jamii wrote: post #50

The change of focus is perhaps hard to understand without more context. Basically, there are two really different modes of programming: Most of what we see on HN is about building applications, servers, websites etc. Big, monolithic things that take weeks to years and are deployed to somewhere else and used by lots of people. Most programming tools are built for this kind of work, where the time between writing the c…

I am currently working as an Actuarial Analyst, but I have also worked several years as a programmer.

As an analyst the tools I use are excel, access, SAS Enterprise guide and Oracle SQL developer. One of the big problems I face is that we have no good way to abstract away a process and really make it reusable.

My general work flow is using SAS to pull data from multiple sources, combine and run the data through some series of logic/calculations. Then take the resulting data, copy to excel for some additional analysis or report. This might be for a monthly/quarterly report or an analysis that needs to be update with the additional runout of data.

But these steps are all tightly coupled together. If I want to rerun the same logic on a different data set, or an updated data set I will copy and paste all of the files, update the queries. I have no way to bundle them together so that I can easily reuse with different data sources, or refreshed data.

Really want I want is someway to encapsulate different sets of data transformations/calculations into to functions to reuse them in different contexts and among different people.

Re: Eve Version 0

#85

Post by adinb »

z92 wrote: post #26
tzakrajs wrote: post #11

I still have no idea what this is after reading the blog.

It's a MS Access like desktop database application. That's what I understood.

That's how I understood it as well; maybe I'm missing something?

I'd love to see a web-native supported version of Access or File maker that was fully open source and had modern programming languages fully baked in.

Re: Eve Version 0

#86

Post by rafaelferreira »

The new value proposition is reminiscent of DabbleDB, which was a groundbreaking product that didn't seem to get enough traction to sustain a business. Is this comparison apt? Any ideas on why Eve has a better chance of succeeding?

Re: Eve Version 0

#87

Post by dang »

sanderjd wrote: post #80
dang wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It accidentally triggered a spam filter. Sorry; we fixed it.

Thanks! It's a testament to how rarely things go wrong that seeing such a good comment ranked so low was so surprising to me.

We're currently testing a feature that lets users unkill comments that shouldn't be dead. Once we roll it out to everyone, this will hopefully be less of a problem.

Re: Eve Version 0

#88

Post by a-dub »

So every time I've seen something like this (ETL tools, LabView, Scratch, pd/max, etc) I've noticed a common problem. They're dead simple to create simple things in, but often times simple things grow into complex things over time and once things become complex things implemented in graphical programming languages they become nightmarish to maintain. Subtle logic ends up buried... Simple processes like a full search of a project or diffing between two versions become impossible or clunky and you end up with the one person who knows how to maintain X.

Is there anything here that addresses this problem?

Re: Eve Version 0

#89

Post by bunderbunder »

mkozlows wrote: post #44
dgreensp wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the opposite message, which is that programming tools and the process of programming are so bad, it's hard to get a computer to do a simple task for you without tearing your hair out, never mind building a UI. A better IDE (basically a better text editor) doesn't even scratch the surface.

The thing is, it's easy to say something is hard. Programming is definitely hard! The question is: Is it hard essentially, or is it hard accidentally? That is, can you remove unnecessary complexity from programming and suddenly it'll become easy? That was the proposition behind first LightTable, and then Eve as originally conceived. But neither of them really found a satisfying answer, a way to say "hey, for making y…

I think a lot of it is essential. At its core, programming is about designing processes and procedures, and I'm not aware of any sphere in which the state of the art inspires much hope. Certainly not law, business or accounting.

But I also think there's a lot of value in continuing to try new things. This complexity is so expensive that the payoff from a successful project could be enormous. And even when projects fail, we can often learn a lot from understanding how they fail. See that recent HN discussion on literate programming for an interesting example.

Re: Eve Version 0

#90

Post by Too »

cmontella wrote: post #52
MrDosu wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that an API is easier to learn by several factors regardless of how complex it is compared to the abstract reasoning and modelling skills to actually transform the faced problems into a precise model.

I respectfully disagree. People who are not programmers use abstract reasoning and modelling skills all the time in their daily lives. They more than have the skills to solve this problem: You have a list of friends and where they are, you have your own location. Find the list of friends that are near your location, and send an alert (text, e-mail, whatever). How hard is that? There is absolutely no inherent complexi…

I frequently use software specifications as a counter argument to this. Non developers can't write specifications without leaving out major key bits in the information, my point then would be that since they are not constrained by limitations of programming language but only their own expressions in written text that should not be a limiting factor.

Your example is extremely simple and could work for a new coder but once things get just slightly more complicated things get messy. I can already find exceptions in your very simple example: how exactly are user supposed to be alerted? Do all users have a mobile number so they can be texted? If not do you try email? What if they are online, do you send an im-message? Should you send to all available addresses? In which order do you prioritize message if you only send to the first available destination, email first or sms first?

Post reply on HN