Why hasn't someone reinvented coding to make it simpler?
Why?
I would say it's currently the simplest it has ever been. Even shit streets can do java.
>>54637084
you dont understand, its simpler than ever
Conceptually it's very simple if you use a language that handles all of the "hardware" problems (e.g. Lisp).
But it turns out that the necessary logic to solve some problems is still too complicated for people like me.
>>54637084
There is only a specific amount to which you can comfortably dumb down the notion of doing stuff conditionally in a certain order and at the same time keep it powerful.
This line has already been crossed often enough.
At this point, making genetic modifications to the human brain is the more feasible way.
Here OP, this one is made of cute little pictures! xD emojicode.org
>>54637084
C++ is a simple version of c
C is a simple version of assembly
Assembly is a simple version of machine code
Machine code is a simple version of pure binary
But they are doing it with drag and drop code and other techniques. Unreal Engine has blueprints which are like MIT's Scratch on steroids. Wolfram has a hella sweet NLP algorithm for maths.
The problem is that the higher level the less efficient it will be.
In the end, programming isn't even that hard. You can learn C in what, one week? Two? The difficulty lies in solving problems, and oftentimes (more like always in my case) finding an algorithm in pseudocode is harder than implementing such algorithm.
>>54637084
First, That's like asking, why hasn't somebody reinvented rockets to send people to other galaxies? People have tried to make coding as simple as possible. How about contributing, instead of waiting for someone else to do it.
Second, coding is simple. Why do you need everything hand fed to you? The real world isn't going to coddle you like mommy and daddy
>>54637084
People reinvent it all the time. That's why we have a million languages.
>>54637084
>composing extremely detailed instructions within complex, sophisticated algorithms whilst maintaining an intuitive user-end experience with maximum flexibility
>"hurr durr why isn't it simple"
Maybe programming isn't for you.
>what is drag and drop
They have, there are programs to take the programming out of programming. Like PEGA.
>>54637084
Then there would be a complete catharsis. Programming is limited by being hard and that's good. You wouldn't want your project be compromised by 15 yrs olds.
>>54637173
Java is a simpler version of c++
ruby on rails is super easy
You can't dumb down problem solving hombre.
>>54638156
Pajeet pls
>>54637084
Unreal Blueprint did good imhotbhfam (In My Honest Opinion To Be Honest Famalam)
if pajeets can do programming, then so can you OP
>>54637084
There are different ways of being "simple"
It can be simple to learn like C or Go. But it makes soft vulnerable for programmer's mistakes and making something complex is much harder with them.
It can be harder to learn, but easier to write complex things. Or it supposes to make less mistakes. Like functional languages.
Install scratch
> current year
Can't simply tell the computer what to do.
Christianity has a lot to answer for.
>>54637284
>>54638081
From now on, drag and dropping females
>simplified code
>reinvented
>>54638846
didn't know girls + math would turn me on this much
>>54639079
girls + math = (boner x precum)2
>>54637084
They did, it's called brainfuck.
>>54637595
Your analogy isn't even remotely relevant to what OP was saying.
>>54638846
Wouldn't one pair of boxer briefs be enough?
>>54639116
full blown erection in linear time
>>54637284
>You can learn C in what, one week?
maybe the basics, which are worthless. if you haven't mastered it you don't know it.
>>54637284
>You can learn C in what, one week? Two?
Maybe basics.
>>54639315
>>54637284
Most people think of learning a language as learning the basics.
Then they forget that even a "small" library has a shit load of functions and even a "small" language has shit loads of uses. It takes four years minimum to really "learn" a language.
>>54637084
https://scratch.mit.edu/
>>54639371
Scratch legit helped me think algorithmically. It's a great tool for clearing your perception of programming.
>>54637146
This. An algorithm written C/C++ translated to Basic is still just as complicated.
>>54637146
>But it turns out that the necessary logic to solve some problems is still too complicated for people like me.
Given any person you can always find an algorithmic problem too hard for them.
>>54637084
the only way to make programming simpler is to make the compiler and the interpreter more complex. You are still left with a big problem: How do you creat simple programming languages that are sufficiently low level to be meaningful without a more complex interpreter. Therefore, why not just train programmers better in low level languages and leave the high level languages to the dummies?
>>54639633
I think OP is referring to shitfests like Android development.
assembly is the simplest language, the syntax has only assignment statements (mov) and jump statements (jmp) and comparison statements, all branching and loops are handled by comparison and jump, you cant get simpler than that really
>>54639714
It's abundant, however.
>>54639138
insecure about camel toe
If you can't program in 2016, you'll never be able to.
>>54637084
Want to write code in binary ?. Languages are "easy". It's Pajeets writing retard-tier shit that don't know how to debug.
Even supermodels can code these days. Come on OP, get your shit together.
>>54642389
>yeah, that area
>enhance
>>54642590
>>54642617
not going to lie, that's how i change directories
>>54637084
>wanting to invite even more retards
Its already way easier than it should be
>>54637173
>Machine code is a simple version of pure binary
You don't know what you're talking about.
>>54637084
They have:
>Java
>Ruby
>Swift
Each of these languages had a specific design goal to make coding simpler, and they did.
The thing is that if you make things TOO simple then you restrict the ability of the language. So it's about finding a balance. Go and pick up a really easy language if you want (I hear VB is quite easy), but then you won't have as much control over how the program runs, which will probably result in the end result being shitter.
>>54637084
It can't be simpler. We already have a shitload of Pajeets and we definitely don't want Tyrones coding.
>>54638400
If I ever feel incompetent with my code, I always remember this. Makes me feel better.
>>54637084
>what are stored programs
>what is assembly code
>what is structured programing
>what are dynamic languages
>what are IDEs
>what is type inference
>what is program synthesis
>>54637084
There's potentially millions of dollars for whatever team finally manages to create a compiler that simplifies coding so non-programmers can do shit. How are Biologists supposed to multithread a protein folding algorithm for a supercomputer to spread accross 100k cores unless they know some programming shit? Solve this answer and win at life.
>>54643033
(gitgud "fagit")
>>54637157
I'm mad
I'm beyond mad
I'm fucking enraged
Holy SHIT
WHY
Every time a language is created, it was because someone intended to solve exactly OP's problem.
Since languages are still being designed, it's safe to assume that the answer to OP is 'that's very hard to do'.
I can't imagine that programming can get any easier than the modern managed languages like Java and C#.
But then again, I said "I don't think graphics will get better than this" the first time I played a N64.
>>54637084
TLDR; because P != NP
They have, it is called Swift. Apple did it again.
>>54637084
This has to be bait.
If you can't python, you don't deserve to own a computer. Get off.
Because there are already enough incompetent morons in the industry
>>54637084
>Why hasn't someone reinvented coding to make it simpler?
AI will turn test-driven-development into trivial programming
write tests, write prototypes, let PC sit overnight, come back to working code.
>>54637173
>C++ is a simple version of c
>Machine code is a simple version of pure binary
Retard
Someday you will be able to code in regular readable human speech:
(muhtaxes)
{
>hey senpai, draw that nice UI I like from DOOM on the screen
> now import all my tax information from that file on my desktop
> find anything I can write off using the paramaters on irs.com
> ???
> profit
}
>>54637084
but there is, it's called macros.
>>54645149
>>54642695
Not that guy but please explain
>>54646243
Machine code is pure binary.
>>54637173
>C++ is a simple version of c
>>54637084
Because making it simple means making it less complex. Therefore, less stuff to do.
>>54637084
OP try coding in assembly. After you spend some time in that you'll love how simple any higher level language is by comparison.
They already did. It's called higher level languages. They've been around for decades.
>>54637173
good b8
