Difference between revisions of "Tangible values (Conal Elliott)"

From apm
Jump to: navigation, search
(Just added main links for now)
 
(Notes / Ideas: linebreaks typofix)
 
(5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 7: Line 7:
 
On Conal Elliotts homepage:
 
On Conal Elliotts homepage:
 
* The Eros demo: http://conal.net/papers/Eros/
 
* The Eros demo: http://conal.net/papers/Eros/
 +
* Paper: http://conal.net/papers/Eros/eros-icfp-2007-printed.pdf
 
* Paper: http://conal.net/papers/Eros/eros.pdf ([https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221241258_Tangible_functional_programming via ResearchGate])
 
* Paper: http://conal.net/papers/Eros/eros.pdf ([https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221241258_Tangible_functional_programming via ResearchGate])
 
* Paper: http://conal.net/papers/Eros/talk.pdf
 
* Paper: http://conal.net/papers/Eros/talk.pdf
  
 
On the haskell wiki:
 
On the haskell wiki:
* [https://wiki.haskell.org/Eros Eros]
+
* [https://wiki.haskell.org/Eros Eros] (chapter on "fusion")
 
* [https://wiki.haskell.org/Tangible_Value Tangible value]
 
* [https://wiki.haskell.org/Tangible_Value Tangible value]
 +
* [https://wiki.haskell.org/DeepArrow DeepArrow]
 +
* [https://wiki.haskell.org/GuiTV GuiTV]
 +
* [https://wiki.haskell.org/DataDriven DataDriven] (deprecated in favor of reactive)
  
 
On hackage:
 
On hackage:
Line 19: Line 23:
 
* [https://hackage.haskell.org/package/GuiTV '''GuiTV''': GUIs for Tangible Values] <small>GuiTV is a very small library that extends the TV (tangible value) framework with graphical user interfaces, using Phooey. </small>
 
* [https://hackage.haskell.org/package/GuiTV '''GuiTV''': GUIs for Tangible Values] <small>GuiTV is a very small library that extends the TV (tangible value) framework with graphical user interfaces, using Phooey. </small>
 
* [https://hackage.haskell.org/package/DeepArrow '''DeepArrow''': Arrows for "deep application"]
 
* [https://hackage.haskell.org/package/DeepArrow '''DeepArrow''': Arrows for "deep application"]
 +
 +
Other:
 +
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20081224011935/http://darcs.haskell.org:80/packages/Eros/dist/ Eros distribution from internetarchive]
 +
 +
== Notes / Ideas ==
 +
 +
Tangible values may go well together with annotated lambda diagrams. <br>
 +
See:
 +
* [[Annotated lambda diagram]]
 +
* [[Annotated lambda diagram mockups]]
 +
 +
That is because: <br>
 +
ALDs always are a value. <br>
 +
ALDs typically leave a triangular unused whitespace (blackspace in dark mode) where tangible values could be fitted in. <br>
 +
Perhaps even more white-space than textual code. <br>
 +
Relative scales between ALD and TV could be see-saw scaled depending <br>
 +
on priority of what one wants to see more.
 +
 +
The original idea of TVs is to hide code fully.<br>
 +
It might be beneficial though to allow associated code to be displayed. <br>
 +
And given ALD seem like the "middlest" midpoint between graphical and textual code representation, <br>
 +
it might be not as disruptive to add ALDs to TVs as to add pure textual code to TVs.
 +
 +
[[Category:Conal Elliott]]

Latest revision as of 12:23, 11 July 2023

This article is a stub. It needs to be expanded.

External links

On Conal Elliotts homepage:

On the haskell wiki:

On hackage:

Other:

Notes / Ideas

Tangible values may go well together with annotated lambda diagrams.
See:

That is because:
ALDs always are a value.
ALDs typically leave a triangular unused whitespace (blackspace in dark mode) where tangible values could be fitted in.
Perhaps even more white-space than textual code.
Relative scales between ALD and TV could be see-saw scaled depending
on priority of what one wants to see more.

The original idea of TVs is to hide code fully.
It might be beneficial though to allow associated code to be displayed.
And given ALD seem like the "middlest" midpoint between graphical and textual code representation,
it might be not as disruptive to add ALDs to TVs as to add pure textual code to TVs.