I absolutely hate no-code systems.
-
and yes I know I am speaking to the choir here. But I just have to vent. so I am working in this system that is based upon data and everything I am sure is in SQL somewhere in the clouds. but am I allowed to connect with like SQL management studio or heck even some sort of command terminal? Nope! so no SQL select available. You HAVE to use their interface. you have to select the whole table first and then you deselect the fields you dont want then you can apply a where clause it is all a stupid IDE with no way to write any freakin Code! and yes I know THEY "think" and THEY "say" you don't need a tech to do this. But only a real tech can actually figure it out. So the no code is less than useless because you actually haven't eliminated a tech job. You have just made it harder.
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
Clearly this will be an unpopular opinion here, but I believe low/no-code has its place. And honestly I've seen it proven out a few times where I work. I agree that it will never replace full development in all instances, but there are times when having a developer or even an intelligent power user quickly (point #1) build out simple (point #2) solutions with very little interference from security (point #3). At least this is what I have seen first-hand in the projects that have succeeded at my place of work. The "inflexibility" of low/no-code is, in my opinion, guardrails preventing the power user from destroying more than a few decks of the Deathstar. If you want the whole thing blown up, that's when you need a full stack developer! :-)
-
I assume you code exclusively in assembler, to preserve 'flexibility'?
I prefer IBM System\360 Machine Language, entered via toggle switches, one for each bit.
-
and yes I know I am speaking to the choir here. But I just have to vent. so I am working in this system that is based upon data and everything I am sure is in SQL somewhere in the clouds. but am I allowed to connect with like SQL management studio or heck even some sort of command terminal? Nope! so no SQL select available. You HAVE to use their interface. you have to select the whole table first and then you deselect the fields you dont want then you can apply a where clause it is all a stupid IDE with no way to write any freakin Code! and yes I know THEY "think" and THEY "say" you don't need a tech to do this. But only a real tech can actually figure it out. So the no code is less than useless because you actually haven't eliminated a tech job. You have just made it harder.
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
You aren't the only professional developer that has a distaste for low-code/no-code. I recently did something in low-code/no-code just to try to please management. The program ran horridly slow, had poor version control and was difficult to debug. Now, I'm nearly finished rewriting the equivalent program in a conventional language and the former issues are gone. In this particular case, the conventional language solution is far superior to the low-code/no-code solution.
-
and yes I know I am speaking to the choir here. But I just have to vent. so I am working in this system that is based upon data and everything I am sure is in SQL somewhere in the clouds. but am I allowed to connect with like SQL management studio or heck even some sort of command terminal? Nope! so no SQL select available. You HAVE to use their interface. you have to select the whole table first and then you deselect the fields you dont want then you can apply a where clause it is all a stupid IDE with no way to write any freakin Code! and yes I know THEY "think" and THEY "say" you don't need a tech to do this. But only a real tech can actually figure it out. So the no code is less than useless because you actually haven't eliminated a tech job. You have just made it harder.
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
Just wait till they discover COBOL. Anybody can read or write COBOL code (even managers) because it's in human language! :laugh:
-
You seem to assume it's SQL Server, but it may not be, and even if it is it may not be next year. If you code against the database directly your work will break when the data is moved, to another server, another database system, or whatever. I imagine the system designers want to prevent that. The system is not there for your convenience, it's there to benefit the business and you are presumably engaged for your professional skills in working with it. Why not suggest improvements to the interface that would simplify matters, instead of ranting that it doesn't suit your skill level? If you can show how much time and cost they would save, you might find them welcomed....
Migrating to a different DB would mean re-writing the SQL anyway, plus possible changes to the interface as well. I don't see how removing the ability to work directly with SQL would help with this, unless the people using the system can't be trusted with SQL (in which case, maybe there are bigger problems). I also don't get how you can design the structure and indexing on a DB without knowing how the data is going to be used.
-
Reminds me of the report generator in CR, or the venerable BizTalk or any number of systems designed to move the coding to the power user, not just a waste of time by the bane of any developer.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity - RAH I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP
Now that reminds me of a time we (my boss) thought to do the same. The project was scuttled after we tested the proof of concept on fellow employees and managers. They couldn’t/wouldn’t do it, so we decided against rolling out to clients. :(( :)
Time is the differentiation of eternity devised by man to measure the passage of human events. - Manly P. Hall Mark Just another cog in the wheel
-
and yes I know I am speaking to the choir here. But I just have to vent. so I am working in this system that is based upon data and everything I am sure is in SQL somewhere in the clouds. but am I allowed to connect with like SQL management studio or heck even some sort of command terminal? Nope! so no SQL select available. You HAVE to use their interface. you have to select the whole table first and then you deselect the fields you dont want then you can apply a where clause it is all a stupid IDE with no way to write any freakin Code! and yes I know THEY "think" and THEY "say" you don't need a tech to do this. But only a real tech can actually figure it out. So the no code is less than useless because you actually haven't eliminated a tech job. You have just made it harder.
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
I worked for a startup company developing such a tool and put many years of thought into it. The goal, of course, was to come up with a way to simplify mobile application development to reduce the time and skill needed to generate an app. It started with trying to do as much as possible with drag and drop in some sort of visual interface. We generated many custom mobile apps with the system for customers, but what we learned that you can only do so much with drag and drop, more custom control was needed. So we allowed more detailed configuration via direct manipulation of the underlying data. Then we learned, configuration can only take you so far, more control was needed. It turns out, there are some things that are actually easier and more concise to define in code than configuration or drag and drop! Trying to break down code into configurable data, at some point actually becomes more complicated than the code you are trying to replace. Then we started looking into defining our own scripting language, our own debugger, etc... which was crazy. So here we are trying to eliminate code and it came full circle and we are trying to define a new language. It failed in the end. I think a better approach is to actually build similar tools, but build it on an existing language like C++. Don't try to eliminate the developer, but give him tools to generate code and dramatically improve productivity. Go after the best of both worlds. You get the best possible end result with native generated C++ code, best possible user interface, best possible performance, and if customization is necessary (it always is), you are building on the best possible language with the best extensibility, cross platform at the code level, etc... What say you?
-
and yes I know I am speaking to the choir here. But I just have to vent. so I am working in this system that is based upon data and everything I am sure is in SQL somewhere in the clouds. but am I allowed to connect with like SQL management studio or heck even some sort of command terminal? Nope! so no SQL select available. You HAVE to use their interface. you have to select the whole table first and then you deselect the fields you dont want then you can apply a where clause it is all a stupid IDE with no way to write any freakin Code! and yes I know THEY "think" and THEY "say" you don't need a tech to do this. But only a real tech can actually figure it out. So the no code is less than useless because you actually haven't eliminated a tech job. You have just made it harder.
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
I completely agree. Think of it this way, if you make a "program" that only increments an INT by a number, but then someone asks you to increment by 0.5 :confused:. Originally it was an INT. The no code says the same, I can only work with INTs, so don't change the parameter. No code = More Work = Hype = forgotten in 1 Year. :zzz:
-
What you are saying may be right on some level. The OP wants to vent. Let’s let him do that. And why don’t you pull your lip over your face and swallow.
My suggestion was more sensible, and more likely to achieve a useful outcome. Anyway a 'nocode' system suggests that you don't write SQL code to use it. The questioner doesn't say but I inferred that the API returns data structured in some way (maybe JSON, maybe XML, maybe some other technique that you have to further work with. The intent must be to decouple the data repository from the user, and apart from security that usually is to ensure that if/when the data repository is changed the client side doesn't break.
-
I worked for a startup company developing such a tool and put many years of thought into it. The goal, of course, was to come up with a way to simplify mobile application development to reduce the time and skill needed to generate an app. It started with trying to do as much as possible with drag and drop in some sort of visual interface. We generated many custom mobile apps with the system for customers, but what we learned that you can only do so much with drag and drop, more custom control was needed. So we allowed more detailed configuration via direct manipulation of the underlying data. Then we learned, configuration can only take you so far, more control was needed. It turns out, there are some things that are actually easier and more concise to define in code than configuration or drag and drop! Trying to break down code into configurable data, at some point actually becomes more complicated than the code you are trying to replace. Then we started looking into defining our own scripting language, our own debugger, etc... which was crazy. So here we are trying to eliminate code and it came full circle and we are trying to define a new language. It failed in the end. I think a better approach is to actually build similar tools, but build it on an existing language like C++. Don't try to eliminate the developer, but give him tools to generate code and dramatically improve productivity. Go after the best of both worlds. You get the best possible end result with native generated C++ code, best possible user interface, best possible performance, and if customization is necessary (it always is), you are building on the best possible language with the best extensibility, cross platform at the code level, etc... What say you?
The suggestion that C++ is "the best possible language" will probably elicit some choice words from a large section of the profession! I notice how defensive all you coders are (I'm one myself, by the way, nearly a half century of coding experience behind me, come of it on very complex applications) at the idea that "nocode" systems may have merit. I remember way back when Pascal was similarly and widely derided by "real programmers" as a limited language of no merit outside beginners' classrooms, and then found myself managing and supporting a network of CAD workstations running a very stable multi-user, multi-tasking Unix-like operating system written wholly in....Pascal! Not such a Mickey Mouse language after all. Decent programmers will always be in demand, especially those who can adapt to new approaches. Those who can't or won't will wither away, and being defensive about progress or contemptuous towards those who see opportunity in it isn't going to change that.
-
I prefer IBM System\360 Machine Language, entered via toggle switches, one for each bit.
Bring back Colossus and the Manchester Baby, I say.
-
and yes I know I am speaking to the choir here. But I just have to vent. so I am working in this system that is based upon data and everything I am sure is in SQL somewhere in the clouds. but am I allowed to connect with like SQL management studio or heck even some sort of command terminal? Nope! so no SQL select available. You HAVE to use their interface. you have to select the whole table first and then you deselect the fields you dont want then you can apply a where clause it is all a stupid IDE with no way to write any freakin Code! and yes I know THEY "think" and THEY "say" you don't need a tech to do this. But only a real tech can actually figure it out. So the no code is less than useless because you actually haven't eliminated a tech job. You have just made it harder.
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
No-Code is just snake oil for incompetent project managers...
-
Which went back to coding in ILE. Ah the joys of RPG calcsheets.
-
The suggestion that C++ is "the best possible language" will probably elicit some choice words from a large section of the profession! I notice how defensive all you coders are (I'm one myself, by the way, nearly a half century of coding experience behind me, come of it on very complex applications) at the idea that "nocode" systems may have merit. I remember way back when Pascal was similarly and widely derided by "real programmers" as a limited language of no merit outside beginners' classrooms, and then found myself managing and supporting a network of CAD workstations running a very stable multi-user, multi-tasking Unix-like operating system written wholly in....Pascal! Not such a Mickey Mouse language after all. Decent programmers will always be in demand, especially those who can adapt to new approaches. Those who can't or won't will wither away, and being defensive about progress or contemptuous towards those who see opportunity in it isn't going to change that.
By best possible end result I mean the best possible compiled native performance. Not necessarily the easiest to program, but the best result for the end user of the app. I think some of the higher level languages suffer from the same problems and shortcomings of no-code but to a lesser degree. Higher level languages such as Java, C#, and even web programming in general were created to save coding time. But they all sacrifice something to get there, runtime performance. I think we need to find better solutions that increase developer productivity without sacrificing native performance and native user interface capabilities.
-
I completely agree. Think of it this way, if you make a "program" that only increments an INT by a number, but then someone asks you to increment by 0.5 :confused:. Originally it was an INT. The no code says the same, I can only work with INTs, so don't change the parameter. No code = More Work = Hype = forgotten in 1 Year. :zzz:
This is exactly what I experienced when trying to build such a system. What would be a better approach in your opinion to provide tools to dramatically enhance the productivity of developers?
-
and yes I know I am speaking to the choir here. But I just have to vent. so I am working in this system that is based upon data and everything I am sure is in SQL somewhere in the clouds. but am I allowed to connect with like SQL management studio or heck even some sort of command terminal? Nope! so no SQL select available. You HAVE to use their interface. you have to select the whole table first and then you deselect the fields you dont want then you can apply a where clause it is all a stupid IDE with no way to write any freakin Code! and yes I know THEY "think" and THEY "say" you don't need a tech to do this. But only a real tech can actually figure it out. So the no code is less than useless because you actually haven't eliminated a tech job. You have just made it harder.
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
Preach Brother Preach. No Code means NO Repair when you need it NO UpDate when you need it and LOTS AND LOTS OF UNNEEDED AND UNWANTED OVERHEAD!
-
My suggestion was more sensible, and more likely to achieve a useful outcome. Anyway a 'nocode' system suggests that you don't write SQL code to use it. The questioner doesn't say but I inferred that the API returns data structured in some way (maybe JSON, maybe XML, maybe some other technique that you have to further work with. The intent must be to decouple the data repository from the user, and apart from security that usually is to ensure that if/when the data repository is changed the client side doesn't break.
haughtonomous wrote:
The intent must be to ...
And they might have even rationalized the design that way. But very seldom does it work. Adding complexity because something might happen in an unknown future is almost always guaranteed to lead to increased maintenance costs. And more coupling. That is because the API/interface was not in fact designed to be independent but rather was designed as a wrapper for the existing functionality. So in other words instead of starting with business requirements they started with the functional definition of the very system they are trying to make it independent from.
-
haughtonomous wrote:
The intent must be to ...
And they might have even rationalized the design that way. But very seldom does it work. Adding complexity because something might happen in an unknown future is almost always guaranteed to lead to increased maintenance costs. And more coupling. That is because the API/interface was not in fact designed to be independent but rather was designed as a wrapper for the existing functionality. So in other words instead of starting with business requirements they started with the functional definition of the very system they are trying to make it independent from.
The criticism here seems to be confusing the idea with the implementation. Maybe this one wasn't well implemented, maybe so far few, if any, such systems have been because it is a hard nut to crack and as is normal, people are still working out how to do it well. But the idea is just another evolutionary step in software development - and 'proper programmers' are naturally very defensive about preserving their occupation. IMHO their arguments against the nocode idea are no different in intent than the unnecessarily convoluted and opaque documents produced by lawyers, for example, to protect their profession against redundancy. At its heart the nocode idea is just another level of abstraction and decoupling, both important principals in software, but the more of this you have, the less flexibility and more constraints you have on what you can do, and that can be frustrating. Horses for courses. And of course any well designed system will lend itself to catering for what might happen in future, because otherwise it will have a very short life!