Re: OpenSCAD Digest, Vol 41, Issue 30

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSCAD Digest, Vol 41, Issue 30

Matt Maier
Hey, I've been ghosting on the discussion for a while.

If  the possibility of rewriting the OpenSCAD interface is real then why not go all the way and make the syntax as close to plain english as possible? Something like LiveCode's approach http://www.runrev.com/products/livecode/text-and-data-processing/

Seems like the functions that modelers want to use are basically the same no matter what the engine is doing to accomplish them. The user doesn't care, they just know what shape they want to get to; are parentheses and semicolons really necessary to describe that?

My suggestion is that if you want the backend to get improved, or you want several projects to merge, or anything that involves "man years" of work, then you're either going to have to pay someone or you're going to have to get a bigger user base. The way to get a bigger user base is to make it easier to use. Even guys with programming experience are expressing frustration with the way OpenSCAD currently works, so there's no way the general user base is going to expand. Without more users you won't be able to attract more/better developers.

Just my thought on the matter
-Matt

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 11:44:53 +0100
From: Tom Cook <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [OpenSCAD] Lua
To: [hidden email]
Message-ID:
        <CAFSh4UywtSXiwVEophVAMqT5CEwr0XwTako8wVLYJ373=[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:36 AM, nop head <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I don't understand why you find the syntax odd. The syntax is almost
> identical to a subset of C. Are you sure you don't mean the semantics, which
> are declarative / functional rather than imperative?

The oddness is precisely that the syntax is fairly close to C, so you
might expect the semantics to resemble it, too.  Taking the syntax
from one language and the semantics from another and mashing them
together is just a (declarative?) recipe for confusing people.




_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rocklinux.net/mailman/listinfo/openscad
http://openscad.org - https://flattr.com/thing/121566
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSCAD Digest, Vol 41, Issue 30

nophead
Anybody have an idea how big the user base is?


On 17 April 2013 14:06, Matt Maier <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hey, I've been ghosting on the discussion for a while.

If  the possibility of rewriting the OpenSCAD interface is real then why not go all the way and make the syntax as close to plain english as possible? Something like LiveCode's approach http://www.runrev.com/products/livecode/text-and-data-processing/

Seems like the functions that modelers want to use are basically the same no matter what the engine is doing to accomplish them. The user doesn't care, they just know what shape they want to get to; are parentheses and semicolons really necessary to describe that?

My suggestion is that if you want the backend to get improved, or you want several projects to merge, or anything that involves "man years" of work, then you're either going to have to pay someone or you're going to have to get a bigger user base. The way to get a bigger user base is to make it easier to use. Even guys with programming experience are expressing frustration with the way OpenSCAD currently works, so there's no way the general user base is going to expand. Without more users you won't be able to attract more/better developers.

Just my thought on the matter
-Matt

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 11:44:53 +0100
From: Tom Cook <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [OpenSCAD] Lua
To: [hidden email]
Message-ID:
        <CAFSh4UywtSXiwVEophVAMqT5CEwr0XwTako8wVLYJ373=[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:36 AM, nop head <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I don't understand why you find the syntax odd. The syntax is almost
> identical to a subset of C. Are you sure you don't mean the semantics, which
> are declarative / functional rather than imperative?

The oddness is precisely that the syntax is fairly close to C, so you
might expect the semantics to resemble it, too.  Taking the syntax
from one language and the semantics from another and mashing them
together is just a (declarative?) recipe for confusing people.




_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rocklinux.net/mailman/listinfo/openscad
http://openscad.org - https://flattr.com/thing/121566


_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rocklinux.net/mailman/listinfo/openscad
http://openscad.org - https://flattr.com/thing/121566
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSCAD Digest, Vol 41, Issue 30

Peter Falke
Lets count:

I


(+ all costumizer on thingiverse)

:)


On 17 April 2013 15:17, nop head <[hidden email]> wrote:
Anybody have an idea how big the user base is?


On 17 April 2013 14:06, Matt Maier <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hey, I've been ghosting on the discussion for a while.

If  the possibility of rewriting the OpenSCAD interface is real then why not go all the way and make the syntax as close to plain english as possible? Something like LiveCode's approach http://www.runrev.com/products/livecode/text-and-data-processing/

Seems like the functions that modelers want to use are basically the same no matter what the engine is doing to accomplish them. The user doesn't care, they just know what shape they want to get to; are parentheses and semicolons really necessary to describe that?

My suggestion is that if you want the backend to get improved, or you want several projects to merge, or anything that involves "man years" of work, then you're either going to have to pay someone or you're going to have to get a bigger user base. The way to get a bigger user base is to make it easier to use. Even guys with programming experience are expressing frustration with the way OpenSCAD currently works, so there's no way the general user base is going to expand. Without more users you won't be able to attract more/better developers.

Just my thought on the matter
-Matt

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 11:44:53 +0100
From: Tom Cook <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [OpenSCAD] Lua
To: [hidden email]
Message-ID:
        <CAFSh4UywtSXiwVEophVAMqT5CEwr0XwTako8wVLYJ373=[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:36 AM, nop head <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I don't understand why you find the syntax odd. The syntax is almost
> identical to a subset of C. Are you sure you don't mean the semantics, which
> are declarative / functional rather than imperative?

The oddness is precisely that the syntax is fairly close to C, so you
might expect the semantics to resemble it, too.  Taking the syntax
from one language and the semantics from another and mashing them
together is just a (declarative?) recipe for confusing people.




_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rocklinux.net/mailman/listinfo/openscad
http://openscad.org - https://flattr.com/thing/121566


_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rocklinux.net/mailman/listinfo/openscad
http://openscad.org - https://flattr.com/thing/121566



--
[hidden email]

P.S. Falls meine E-Mail kürzer ausfällt als Dir angenehm ist:
Ich probiere gerade aus kurze Antworten statt gar keine Antworten zu schreiben.
Wenn Du gerne mehr lesen möchtest, dann lass es mich bitte wissen.

P.S. In case my e-mail is shorter than you enjoy:
I am currently trying short replies instead of no replies at all.
Please let me know, if you like to read more.

Enjoy!

_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rocklinux.net/mailman/listinfo/openscad
http://openscad.org - https://flattr.com/thing/121566
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSCAD Digest, Vol 41, Issue 30

kintel
Administrator
In reply to this post by nophead
On 2013-04-17, at 09:17 , nop head wrote:

> Anybody have an idea how big the user base is?
>
Hard to say. Here are some numbers:

o OpenSCAD models on Thingiverse: 5500
o Website traffic: ~1000 per day
o Binary downloads of 2013.01: 14K (excluding linux packages and mirrors)
o Source code downloads of 2013.01: 2K

 -Marius

_______________________________________________
OpenSCAD mailing list
[hidden email]
http://rocklinux.net/mailman/listinfo/openscad
http://openscad.org - https://flattr.com/thing/121566