PECAN: Program Development Systems that Support Multiple Views
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Multilevel EXIT and CYCLE aren't so bad
ACM SIGPLAN Notices
The TEXbook
The Programming Language Aspects of ThingLab, a Constraint-Oriented Simulation Laboratory
ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS)
Report on the algorithmic language ALGOL 60
Communications of the ACM
Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness
Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness
A session with Tinker: Interleaving program testing with program design
LFP '80 Proceedings of the 1980 ACM conference on LISP and functional programming
ACM '77 Proceedings of the 1977 annual conference
Pygmalion: a creative programming environment.
Pygmalion: a creative programming environment.
An information manipulation environment for monitoring parallel programs
AVI '94 Proceedings of the workshop on Advanced visual interfaces
INHOUSE: an information manipulation environment for monitoring parallel programs
CHI '94 Conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Programming and Computing Software
A dataflow representation for defining behaviours within virtual environments
VRAIS '96 Proceedings of the 1996 Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium (VRAIS 96)
Exploring the general-purpose visual alternative
Journal of Visual Languages and Computing
Taxonomies of visual programming and program visualization
Journal of Visual Languages and Computing
A declarative specification and semantics for visual languages
Journal of Visual Languages and Computing
R-technology: A soviet visual programming environment
Journal of Visual Languages and Computing
MicroApps development on mobile phones
IS-EUD'11 Proceedings of the Third international conference on End-user development
Hi-index | 0.00 |
The tantalizing potential of so-called visual and iconic programming remains largely unfulfilled because of several unresolved issues. After briefly enumerating the open problems, we review the BLOX methodology which we recently introduced in an effort to overcome some of them. BLOX has been presented in the literature to date in terms of multiple planar diagrams, which impart to the methodology what may be termed a 2.5-dimensional appearance. In the main part of this paper, we show that this is actually but a special, restricted case of the general methodology, which naturally encompasses three dimensions and more. We then argue that it is often unnatural for programmers to compose programs, to view data structures, and to perform other computer-related activities, in less than 3-D.