Maybe visual programming is the answer, maybe not
All programming is visual, think about it. Text is visual. I&#x27;m not just pointing out a semantic discrepancy here. Text is a specific method of encoding meaning and processes in a visual way.<p>In short, textual programming is just a subset of visual. People think of the dichotomy as a duality of text vs. visual, it is not.<p>Text just has features people tend to like: A Fixed line based structure. Isomorphism with the english vocabulary...  Who says other visual programs can&#x27;t have this either?<p>The issue with a lot of these &quot;visual programs&quot; is that they also represent a subset of Visual Programming similar to how text is just a tiny subset of visual programming. What you are in fact seeing with most &quot;visual programs&quot; is mostly programs represented as graphs.<p>The real dichotomy people are discussing is not text vs. visual but text vs. graph. Whenever I see something like labView or something labeled as a &quot;visual program&quot; it&#x27;s always a program represented with a series of nodes and lines, aka a graph.<p>Hopefully by illustrating the reality of what&#x27;s going on, people can see beyond representing programs as just text or just graphs.<p>There are other ways to represent modules and processes.