meemoo

It comes from "Node Flow."

Or reverse psychology?

I agree about making some easy things hard in my experience with Pure Data.

NoFlo's UI design makes it frictionless to drop in to edit any component's JS, or build a new component.

How does flow-based programming compare with functional reactive programming, like Elm [1] and Bacon.js [2]? Could those be made visual with a graph editor like this? Bacon.js has some flow diagrams [3] to describe some of its advanced concepts.

1. http://elm-lang.org 2. https://github.com/baconjs/bacon.js 3. https://github.com/baconjs/bacon.js/wiki/Diagrams

Dataflow is our pre-alpha graph editor. There is a little bit of glue that connects it to NoFlo, and we're designing it to be easy to connect to other contexts. Jump in if you have suggestions: https://github.com/meemoo/dataflow/issues

I'm imagining a debug view that slows down the flow and shows data traveling through the graph, so you can see it at every step.

Or with the circuit board metaphor, a debug "probe" that would show the data (or a graph of data) traveling through that point.

Different debugging tools will make sense in different domains, but we're considering the challenge.

NoFlo's black boxes can always be opened and modified, whether there is another graph or JavaScript inside.

The tools for interactive prototyping for designers will be built on the foundation that we're building now. So the draggable/spring example could be inside of a black box that exposes the important variables. Designers can use that box as-is, but there is very little friction to seeing and experimenting with how it works inside.

One method for dealing with this is what Pure Data does. You have a message component that can set a specific property of the next component.

    [innerHTML "hello"] -> [div]

At the Scratch level I'd rather just write code. NoFlo's design will allow you to open and edit any component in a live graph.

Diving in and editing the component-level JavaScript is a big part of the design. There will be much less friction than opening XCode.

Good suggestion. This will be coming in the project updates.

The UI is currently written in JS with Backbone. Once it reaches a usable-enough state rewriting it in NoFlo is high on my list.

More than making coding easier, I think we're trying to give strict structure to code and pair it with a visual metaphor to help manage complexity. There is a learning curve, but we're designing it to stick close to JavaScript.

If we succeed, I imagine that we'll just increase the complexity of the coding that we take on. That's an interesting possibility. I'd like to imagine a new generation of startups with more interesting tech than CRUD.

Yes, with Pure Data and Quartz composer.

As a JS hacker I wanted to bring that kind of coding to the browser for kids so I made http://meemoo.org/ as my thesis. Now I have linked up with http://noflojs.org/ to bring the concept to more general purpose JS, Node and browser.

I won't have really convinced myself until I rewrite the graph editor with the graph editor. Working on that now.

> Why does that matter?

Because I want to play with his Drawing Dynamic Viz demo. http://worrydream.com/DrawingDynamicVisualizationsTalkAddend...

I have actually been thinking about 1D coding vs 2D coding. Isn't 2D describing nD a little bit closer? Like a photograph of a sculpture... a little easier to get the concept than with written description, no matter how eloquent.

Re: the ball of yarn, we're trying to design that better in NoFlo's UI. Think about a subway map that designs itself around your focus. Zoom out to see the whole system, in to see the 1D code.

No reason that source-control for a visual programming language couldn't be visual.

But does he ship?

This reminded me of many hours exploring The Geometer's Sketchpad before my coding days (and before that, a straight edge and compass). Ooh just found http://geogebraweb.appspot.com/app.html

I like being able to code in different paradigms and switch between them.

tl;dw:

* "Drawing dead fish" refers to using a dynamic medium (the computer) to make static images and unchanging animation.

* Games represent the promise of dynamic media: things on the screen have behaviors.

* Dynamic behaviors are generally defined by code. We should break that association and design tools that allow more direct, visual manipulation of behaviors.

* Code thinking is like algebra. Tools demonstrated define behaviors more like geometric construction.

* Key takeaway: dissatisfaction with Photoshop, After Effects, and other digital art tools that don't take advantage of the media.

tl;dw:

Design fiction orgs to look up: Superflux, Near Future Lab, Arup Foresight, Royal College of Art, Art Center College of Design, Arizona State University eMerge.

Don't need to write science fiction about future possibilities, just make a low-budget high-polish design fiction film and release it online.

Science fiction is a form of fiction, design fiction is a form of design.

The cycle: question mark -> rising star -> cash cow -> dead dog. Those that live by disruption die by disruption.

In the startup world you work hard and move fast to make other people rich. Then these financiers buy governments and destroy the middle class with "austerity."

The mocking, crotchety tone is Sterling's thing. I appreciate the critique of the scene that I have been working in and around.