[OpenSCAD] Fusion360 and OpenSCAD

Richard Urwin soronlin+openscad at googlemail.com
Tue Oct 4 19:38:51 EDT 2016

In my experience, graphical languages can be too "wordy". Creating the graph
for a complex expression is either pointlessly verbose or one turns to a
text-based syntax for those bits. Imagine trying to create, or understand,
the graph for (a+b)/sqrt(1-a*b/c^2). Where it succeeds, it does so in fields
that text is wholly unsuited for. Labview nodes are inherently complex in
themselves, giving a small graph large expressive power, and Z100 is
representing an organization that text struggles with (a
finite-state-machine). The only mainstream benefit of a graphical language,
in my opinion, is where it is reducing the knowledge barrier in such cases
as Scratch, where learning the necessary syntax is a significant
disadvantage. And even in those cases effort must be expended in producing a
graphical interface that is inherently obvious -- Scratch fits nodes
together like a jigsaw puzzle. Dumping a library full of seemingly identical
nodes on the user with generic arcs to connect them all would confuse them
more than a textual syntax. Labview carefully arranges its library into
related groups with comprehensive help-text and even then it can be baffling
at times.

Graphical programming has been a concept for many years. I was using it in
the early 1980's. But we are mostly still using generic text editors when we
want to write a serious program. To my mind there is a good reason for that.

View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/Fusion360-and-OpenSCAD-tp18493p18535.html
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the Discuss mailing list