Eve Version 0

Check out my note on visual programming. [1]

The short answer is we have lots of tools in mind that will help with this, but programming this way just creates a very different kind of system. We've built some complex things and they've remained fairly flat and we made sure that it is both readily apparent what is contributing to your current query and easy to navigate into it if you want to see more. For the most part these problems boil down to navigation and debugging issues, both of which we have really powerful ideas for. For example, we want our debugging story to be what's called a "why? debugger" where you can click on any value in the system and Eve will show all the data that went into calculating it and every query it went through to get to here.

There's assuredly going to be lots more experimentation needed here, but we have every intention of making this handle more complex things. We're bootstrapping the compiler and eventually the editor, we've built clones of websites, and we'll continue to push the edges of what we can do with it :)

[1]: https://github.com/witheve/Eve/blob/master/design/visualProg...

I kind of did an eye roll at the breathless language in the announcement. I'm trying to unpack that reaction, because I actually really enjoy the first-principles approach that they have taken with their work.

I think, perhaps, it's because there's a fair amount of praxis already out there in the enterprise and small business sectors about this, and I didn't really see reference to any of that, Lotus Notes notwithstanding. I know it's nitpicky, but it was a strong reaction so I thought I would share it. I'll try to unpack it more:

Basically, creating data processing tools for humans is such a fundamental application of computer science that we even have a name for it: Information Technology. And, ever since the Mother of All Demos we have been trying to make a kind of "omni-tool" for data processing, and pretty much falling on our faces.

This is perhaps because a "general purpose tool" usually turns out to be a particular kind of "special purpose tool". The question is whether a large enough segment benefits from general purpose tooling, which entails taking on the overhead of learning how to use this "tool that makes tools" in order to accomplish their many tasks. In other words, there's a layer of indirection. Or, are most people's problems disjoint and specific, so that they benefit more from using a few special purpose tools that can then be loosely coupled together.

For example, let's say for my job I have to manage the generation of reports, etc, and post them on a company website that I maintain. I can use a document editor to edit documents, a communication service to send links to the documents, and a web-based CMS tool to post the final reports to the website. It's not clear that I would be better served, or even could be served (due to the network effect), by an all in one tool-builder tool. Three special purpose tools, which can guide you effectively in each task, might be easier to deal with than one general-purpose tool, all user grousing aside.

This particular type of omni-tool could be described as a"Distributed Filemaker." Filemaker-like tools are definitely popular, but tend not to unseat other special purpose tooling. And they have a problem shared by all powerful data modeling tools: they provide you quite a bit of rope to hang yourself with. If you want to really improve in this space, I suggest you focus on providing a data modeling and coherency paradigm that is appealing to non-technical users, yet successful for managing long term data that changes meaning over time. That would be profound, as poor data modeling is pretty much how all of these projects eventually crash on the rocks. Your users will not ask you for such a thing though, as they don't understand it.

In spite of the eye roll, I wish you luck!

It is good that we keep trying at this problem. Does it feel that as an industry keep trying to solve this problem and never "quite" get it right? I have read about the old "CASE" tools or old VB approaches, for instance. Even Microsoft Access now can generate applications on Azure backed by SQL Azure (SQL Server for the cloud), then there was some Intuit tool (can't remember the name). One can argue Excel itself was quite good at some of these apps. More recently seems like Dabble or Popfly were a thing at least for a few months.

Every time something like this happens, "real developers" feel threatened, while business users love them for their side projects when the "real developers" are too busy to care.

Maybe these types of tools are always destined to come up again (since we reinvent the platforms all the time), and then a few users use them, while real programmers for the most part simply yawn once more.

Are we ever going to push programming to a level of maturity where we can use building blocks and be real productive, yet have the flexibility to create real, sophisticated applications?

Seems we never quite get there.

But it is positive to see that new generations of developers don't stop trying.

I haven't used it extensively, but SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) looks like it does a lot of the things you're talking about.

Great stuff. When will there be a hosted version I can try out?