Something like Scratch or Lego MindStorms is what comes to mind when thinking about codeless software. But this seems like helping someone to code instead of being 100% codeless. And I think that is the way it will have to work in order not to be so limiting. Over time, like all languages/APIs it will improve and more and more people will come out with their own buckets of coding blocks to make it more versatile. No matter what happens though I would always like a way to tweak all generated code, much like a WYSIWYG HTML editor. It will be difficult at first but will only get better with time. But no matter what, coding by hand will always reign supreme.
Stel dat u 超过 20 匹 jaar nog 骏马 dezelfde 软件 zou kunnen gebruiken 阿尔斯努。 Toekomstmuziek？ 诺，欢迎进来 威斯康星大学托科姆斯特丹。 想要无代码 技术 ontwikkelt 软件分区 代码 die simpelweg niet veroudert。
门“逆向工程”kunnen wij u Laten zien hoe uw 软件包 在无代码 uit komt te zien 中。 门 gebruik te maken van 接口， kunnen we bepaalde delen van uw 数据保护系统 Big Bang 实现 noodzakelijk 是。
Wij hebben een manier gevonden om onze 软件 voor altijd mee te Laten 加安。 Omdat we het simpelweg zonde van uw tijd vinden om telkens opnieuw uw 贝德瑞吉夫加工中心 aan een nieuwe ICT 杠杆。
Uw 系统是完美的 aangesloten op uw bedrijfsprocessen。 恩达特韦卢 新科技 Voordelig in kunt zetten om zo Concurrentievoordeel te behalen。 Natuurlijk moet u updaten。 玛尔梅德 软件 Die u nu 门 ons laat 布文，你好，克拉尔·沃尔 de toekomst！
I have looked at the site but the story is extremely vague.
For majority of non-Dutch speakers, I have translated the following text:
Klaar voor de toekomst!
Stel dat u over 20 jaar nog steeds dezelfde software zou kunnen gebruiken als nu. Toekomstmuziek? Nou, welkom in uw toekomst dan. Want Codeless Technology ontwikkelt software zonder code die simpelweg niet veroudert.
Door ´reverse enginering´ kunnen wij u laten zien hoe uw software-pakket er in Codeless uit komt te zien. En door gebruik te maken van interfaces, kunnen we bepaalde delen van uw systeem vervangen zonder dat er een Big Bang implementatie noodzakelijk is.
Wij hebben een manier gevonden om onze software voor altijd mee te laten gaan. Omdat we het simpelweg zonde van uw tijd vinden om telkens opnieuw uw bedrijfsprocessen te moeten uitleggen aan een nieuwe ICT-leverancier.
Uw systeem is perfect aangesloten op uw bedrijfsprocessen. En dat terwijl u de nieuwste technologieën snel en voordelig in kunt zetten om zo concurrentievoordeel te behalen. Natuurlijk moet u updaten. Maar met de software die u nu door ons laat bouwen, bent u gegarandeerd klaar voor de toekomst!
That translates to:
Ready for the future!
Imagine you are using the same software in 20 years. Impossible? No, welcome to your future. Because Codeless Technology creates software without code that does not age.
By 'reverse enginering' we show you your software in Codeless. By using interfaces, we can replace certain pieces of your system without the need for a Big Bang implementation.
We have found a way to let our software last for ever because we think it is a waste of your time to explain your business processes to your ICT supplier again and again.
Your system is perfectly connected to your business processes. And still you are able to use the newest technologies quick and easy so you have an advantage on your competitors. Of course, you still have the need for updates. But with our software, you are guaranteed future ready.
It looks like they have developed a product that uses an existing system and creates a new one using the old system as guide. Without the need to write code. This looks great, but I have serious doubts.
My first question: if they are so excellent, why is their site not in English?
I'm not familiar with this specific product, but I have some familiarity with the "theory" (such as it is) of codeless development.
The primitives of programming languages are there for a reason. So there is a tendency for "codeless" or "mouse-based" development systems to gradually accumulate features that correspond to the primitives of programming languages: something similar to function calls (for reuse of pieces of a design), references to parameters within functions, things that loop, conditional branching, things that aggregate several actions into a single action, things that do arithmetic or string operations, etc. By which point they end up with the same issues as all development systems, which all derive from the tendency of users to push the envelope in looking for ever more complex problems to solve. So then they need refactoring and other nice IDE-style features to help them manage the complexity - by which time the "codeless" distinction is more to do with marketing than actual user experience.
We even see this tendency in many attempts to "start again" with a new set of primitives in a text-source programming language. Haskell does not truly eliminate procedural, stateful coding. It has a way of mimicking such capabilities that tastes pretty authentic - because if it didn't, users would try to simulate it themselves and get it wrong.
Maatwerksoftware，nooit veroudert，die u zelf kunt onderhouden én uitbreiden en die bovendien wordt gemaakt waar u bij staat。
那是：
根据您的要求构建的软件，永远不会老化，您可以自己维护，而且最重要的是，它是在您观看时制作的。
我的结论是他们建造了它，而不是你。
I've done some reading on their site.
It seems to me that they build software for you, which they claim you can expand effortlessly. I don't see that they claim you can use their software te build your own software without using code. Their concept in their words:
Maatwerksoftware, die nooit veroudert, die u zelf kunt onderhouden én uitbreiden en die bovendien wordt gemaakt waar u bij staat.
That is:
Software built to your requirements, that never ages, that you can maintain yourself, and that on top of that is made while you're watching.
I've used the visual development tool of the C Control microcontroller. Although it was possible to use almost every feature of the underlying language (BASIC) it found it to be a waste of time. "Mouse coding" simple loops took way longer than just writing the plain BASIC code.
During my first steps into coding and development I tried other products, (mostly game creators) but they always either lack the features normally available in a coded language or are very slow to work with.
But during the last years I noticed an increase of people who are no longer willing to read (natural) text which they cannot understand the first time they read it. Just a single subordinate clause and they don't want to continue.
So I guess there is a market for these kind of codeless development tools, since you can easily get results and the learning curve is much lower. Most tools I used where pretty self-explanatory.
IMHO codeless development enviroments are best suited for
The results of "codeless" or "graphical" systems that I've seen always end up not reducing real complexity, with the drawbacks of no collaborative effort, cant diff/patch, can't do a version compare, difficult to put in source control, etc.
In short, just not a well thought-out.
I'll bet that they don't scale well to large data sets either.
Which was a product, released in 1981(!) which claimed to make programmers redundant by generating commercial applications codelessly.
That said, I am currently using a codeless development environment - Wirefusion - for generating 3D interactive java applets. It's extremely good, but it's targeted at a very well defined domain and even there has some issues.
I have tested version 1 current version is 2. but as there is not documentation available in English I am a bit baffled as to how we can go ahead building our apps as per our requirements.
Just my two cents, the idea behind codeless development is not only for beginners/people who don't want to learn coding, but also can be used to teach younger children programming, and utilize it as a storytelling medium.
要说与其他 I4GL 的区别很难，因为我不知道那里的所有工具，但让我这样说。 如果将 Codeless 与 MS CRM 4.0 和 Microsoft M 进行比较，您认为与 I4GL 工具有什么区别？
Replying to the post of geocar..(cant reply anymore to my own post)
To say what the differences are with other I4GL is hard since i dont know all the tools out there, but let me put it this way. If one compares Codeless to MS CRM 4.0 and Microsoft M, what would you think are the differences with I4GL tools?
证据就在布丁中； 我不明白为什么这个伯纳德删除了我们的身份。 如果 15 年来一直试图做同样事情的亿万富翁前微软大师查尔斯·西蒙尼 (Charles Simonyi) 在这里发表评论，他会被删除吗？ David Roth，Simparel, Inc. 首席远见者 Simparel dot com 的 David.Roth。
The proof is in the pudding; I don’t understand why this Bernard deleted who we are. If Charles Simonyi the Billionaire ex-Microsoft guru who has been trying to do the same for 15 years would comment here, would he be deleted? David Roth, Chief Visionary, Simparel, Inc. David.Roth at Simparel dot com.
Encanvas 并不便宜。 它旨在使 IT 团队能够摆脱编码，并附带您期望的所有工具，包括云部署。
encanvas 构建于 .net 之上。
Encanvas is completely codeless. It was originally created back in the day to author enterprise-grade situational applications but in the last decade has been used to build anything from spreadsheet replacement type apps to regional traffic systems, business intelligence platforms and eLearning applications.
encanvas doesn't come cheap. It's engineered to enable IT teams to move away from coding and comes with all of the tools you'd expect including cloud deployment.
My boss has a good way to generate apps without his having to write code. He has an automatic programmer (me) write it for him. He uses domain-specific language, and gets a working app. Anything that does the same job would have to be about as smart (or dumb) as that.
When requirements are communicated, a language of symbols is used, whether it is keyboard clicks, mouse clicks, or any other form of input.
If a language maps well onto user concepts and allows very little room for misinterpretation or inconsistencies, then it is a good domain-specific-language.
It is good to try to find better domain-specific-languages. It is bad to try to sell one if you don't have one.
So I guess there is a market for these kind of codeless development tools, since you can easily get results and the learning curve is much lower. Most tools I used where pretty self-explanatory.
IMHO codeless development enviroments are best suited for
beginners people who don't want to learn coding
That is exactly true - and what is accomplished by the neatComponents codeless development platform.
Have a look at www.clearString.com which is targeted at those users
发布评论
评论（16）
类似于 Scratch 或 Lego MindStorms 的东西当想到无代码软件时就会想到。 但这似乎是在帮助某人编码，而不是 100% 无代码。 我认为这就是它必须发挥作用的方式，以免受到如此限制。 随着时间的推移，像所有语言/API 一样，它会得到改进，越来越多的人会推出自己的编码块，以使其更加通用。 不管发生什么，我总是希望有一种方法来调整所有生成的代码，就像所见即所得的 HTML 编辑器一样。 一开始会很困难，但随着时间的推移只会变得更好。 但无论如何，手工编码永远占据主导地位。
Something like Scratch or Lego MindStorms is what comes to mind when thinking about codeless software. But this seems like helping someone to code instead of being 100% codeless. And I think that is the way it will have to work in order not to be so limiting. Over time, like all languages/APIs it will improve and more and more people will come out with their own buckets of coding blocks to make it more versatile. No matter what happens though I would always like a way to tweak all generated code, much like a WYSIWYG HTML editor. It will be difficult at first but will only get better with time. But no matter what, coding by hand will always reign supreme.
我看过该网站，但故事内容非常模糊。
对于大多数非荷兰语使用者，我翻译了以下文字：
这意味着：
看起来他们开发了一种产品，使用现有系统并以旧系统为指导创建新系统。 无需编写代码。 这看起来很棒，但我有严重的疑问。
我的第一个问题：如果他们这么优秀，为什么他们的网站不是英文的？
I have looked at the site but the story is extremely vague.
For majority of non-Dutch speakers, I have translated the following text:
That translates to:
It looks like they have developed a product that uses an existing system and creates a new one using the old system as guide. Without the need to write code. This looks great, but I have serious doubts.
My first question: if they are so excellent, why is their site not in English?
我不熟悉这个特定的产品，但我对无代码开发的“理论”（例如它本身）有一些熟悉。
编程语言的原语的存在是有原因的。 因此，“无代码”或“基于鼠标”的开发系统有逐渐积累与编程语言原语相对应的功能的趋势：类似于函数调用（用于重用设计片段）、对函数内参数的引用，循环的东西，条件分支，将多个动作聚合成一个动作的东西，进行算术或字符串运算的东西等等。到那时，它们最终会遇到与所有开发系统相同的问题，这些问题都源于以下趋势：用户不断挑战极限，寻找更复杂的问题来解决。 因此，他们需要重构和其他不错的 IDE 风格功能来帮助他们管理复杂性 - 到那时，“无代码”区别更多地与营销有关，而不是与实际的用户体验有关。
我们甚至在许多尝试使用文本源编程语言中的一组新原语“重新开始”的尝试中看到了这种趋势。 Haskell 并没有真正消除过程化、有状态的编码。 它有一种模仿此类功能的方式，而且味道非常真实——因为如果没有，用户会尝试自己模拟它，但会出错。
I'm not familiar with this specific product, but I have some familiarity with the "theory" (such as it is) of codeless development.
The primitives of programming languages are there for a reason. So there is a tendency for "codeless" or "mouse-based" development systems to gradually accumulate features that correspond to the primitives of programming languages: something similar to function calls (for reuse of pieces of a design), references to parameters within functions, things that loop, conditional branching, things that aggregate several actions into a single action, things that do arithmetic or string operations, etc. By which point they end up with the same issues as all development systems, which all derive from the tendency of users to push the envelope in looking for ever more complex problems to solve. So then they need refactoring and other nice IDE-style features to help them manage the complexity - by which time the "codeless" distinction is more to do with marketing than actual user experience.
We even see this tendency in many attempts to "start again" with a new set of primitives in a text-source programming language. Haskell does not truly eliminate procedural, stateful coding. It has a way of mimicking such capabilities that tastes pretty authentic - because if it didn't, users would try to simulate it themselves and get it wrong.
我在他们的网站上读过一些内容。
在我看来，他们为你构建软件，他们声称你可以毫不费力地扩展这些软件。 我没有看到他们声称您可以使用他们的软件来构建自己的软件而不使用代码。 用他们的话说，他们的理念是：
那是：
我的结论是他们建造了它，而不是你。
I've done some reading on their site.
It seems to me that they build software for you, which they claim you can expand effortlessly. I don't see that they claim you can use their software te build your own software without using code. Their concept in their words:
That is:
I conclude that they build it, not you.
我使用了 C 控制 微控制器。 尽管可以使用底层语言 (BASIC) 的几乎所有功能，但它发现这是浪费时间。 “鼠标编码”简单循环比编写简单的 BASIC 代码花费的时间要长得多。
在我进入编码和开发的第一步中，我尝试了其他产品（主要是游戏创建者），但它们总是要么缺乏编码语言中通常提供的功能，要么使用起来非常慢。
但在过去的几年里，我注意到越来越多的人不再愿意阅读他们第一次阅读时无法理解的（自然）文本。 只要一个从句，他们就不想继续了。
所以我猜想这种无代码开发工具有市场，因为你可以轻松获得结果并且学习曲线要低得多。 我使用的大多数工具都是不言自明的。
恕我直言，无代码开发环境最适合
I've used the visual development tool of the C Control microcontroller. Although it was possible to use almost every feature of the underlying language (BASIC) it found it to be a waste of time. "Mouse coding" simple loops took way longer than just writing the plain BASIC code.
During my first steps into coding and development I tried other products, (mostly game creators) but they always either lack the features normally available in a coded language or are very slow to work with.
But during the last years I noticed an increase of people who are no longer willing to read (natural) text which they cannot understand the first time they read it. Just a single subordinate clause and they don't want to continue.
So I guess there is a market for these kind of codeless development tools, since you can easily get results and the learning curve is much lower. Most tools I used where pretty self-explanatory.
IMHO codeless development enviroments are best suited for
这个方法看起来不错，值得考虑。 尽管它仍处于实验阶段：http://subtextual.org/subtext2.html
This approach looks great, worth a consideration. Even though it's still at an experimental stage: http://subtextual.org/subtext2.html
我见过的“无代码”或“图形”系统的结果总是最终不会降低真正的复杂性，其缺点是没有协作努力，无法比较/修补，无法进行版本比较，难以放入源代码控制等等。
总之就是没有经过深思熟虑。
我敢打赌它们也不能很好地扩展到大型数据集。
The results of "codeless" or "graphical" systems that I've seen always end up not reducing real complexity, with the drawbacks of no collaborative effort, cant diff/patch, can't do a version compare, difficult to put in source control, etc.
In short, just not a well thought-out.
I'll bet that they don't scale well to large data sets either.
80 年代末出现了 Borland 的 ObectVision。
您可以从废弃软件网站下载副本。
There was Borland's ObectVision in the late '80s.
You can download a copy from an abandonware site.
对此类产品的适当立场是极度怀疑。 我清楚地记得这个...
最后一个
这是一款于 1981 年发布的产品（！），声称通过无代码生成商业应用程序来使程序员变得多余。
也就是说，我目前正在使用无代码开发环境 - Wirefusion - 来生成 3D 交互式 Java 小程序。 它非常好，但它针对的是一个非常明确定义的领域，甚至存在一些问题。
The appropriate stance with these sort of products is extreme scepticism. I distinctly remember this...
The Last One
Which was a product, released in 1981(!) which claimed to make programmers redundant by generating commercial applications codelessly.
That said, I am currently using a codeless development environment - Wirefusion - for generating 3D interactive java applets. It's extremely good, but it's targeted at a very well defined domain and even there has some issues.
我已经测试了版本 1，当前版本是 2。但是由于没有英文文档，我对如何根据我们的要求继续构建应用程序感到有点困惑。
不过，提供的样品看起来令人印象深刻。
I have tested version 1 current version is 2. but as there is not documentation available in English I am a bit baffled as to how we can go ahead building our apps as per our requirements.
The samples provided looked impressive though.
只是我的两分钱，无代码开发背后的想法不仅适合初学者/不想学习编码的人，而且还可以用来教年幼的孩子编程，并将其用作讲故事的媒介。
当然，我指的是Alice。
它有它的市场，但由于它的笨重，我不认为它会取代传统编程（例如在键盘上打字）。
Just my two cents, the idea behind codeless development is not only for beginners/people who don't want to learn coding, but also can be used to teach younger children programming, and utilize it as a storytelling medium.
I am,of course,referring to Alice.
It has it's market, but I don't forsee it taking over traditional programming (eg. typing on the keyboard) due to it's clunkiness.
回复 geocar 的帖子..（无法再回复我自己的帖子）
要说与其他 I4GL 的区别很难，因为我不知道那里的所有工具，但让我这样说。 如果将 Codeless 与 MS CRM 4.0 和 Microsoft M 进行比较，您认为与 I4GL 工具有什么区别？
Replying to the post of geocar..(cant reply anymore to my own post)
To say what the differences are with other I4GL is hard since i dont know all the tools out there, but let me put it this way. If one compares Codeless to MS CRM 4.0 and Microsoft M, what would you think are the differences with I4GL tools?
证据就在布丁中； 我不明白为什么这个伯纳德删除了我们的身份。 如果 15 年来一直试图做同样事情的亿万富翁前微软大师查尔斯·西蒙尼 (Charles Simonyi) 在这里发表评论，他会被删除吗？
David Roth，Simparel, Inc. 首席远见者
Simparel dot com 的 David.Roth。
The proof is in the pudding; I don’t understand why this Bernard deleted who we are. If Charles Simonyi the Billionaire ex-Microsoft guru who has been trying to do the same for 15 years would comment here, would he be deleted?
David Roth, Chief Visionary, Simparel, Inc.
David.Roth at Simparel dot com.
Encanvas 是完全无代码的。 它最初是为了编写企业级情景应用程序而创建的，但在过去十年中已被用于构建从电子表格替换类型应用程序到区域交通系统、商业智能平台和电子学习应用程序的任何内容。
Encanvas 并不便宜。 它旨在使 IT 团队能够摆脱编码，并附带您期望的所有工具，包括云部署。
encanvas 构建于 .net 之上。
Encanvas is completely codeless. It was originally created back in the day to author enterprise-grade situational applications but in the last decade has been used to build anything from spreadsheet replacement type apps to regional traffic systems, business intelligence platforms and eLearning applications.
encanvas doesn't come cheap. It's engineered to enable IT teams to move away from coding and comes with all of the tools you'd expect including cloud deployment.
encanvas is built on .net.
我的老板有一种无需编写代码即可生成应用程序的好方法。 他有一个自动程序员（我）为他编写它。 他使用特定于领域的语言，并获得了一个可用的应用程序。 任何做同样工作的东西都必须和它一样聪明（或愚蠢）。
当传达需求时，会使用符号语言，无论是键盘点击、鼠标点击还是任何其他形式的输入。
如果一种语言能够很好地映射用户概念，并且几乎不存在误解或不一致的空间，那么它就是一种很好的特定于领域的语言。
尝试找到更好的特定领域语言是件好事。
如果您没有一种语言，则尝试出售一种语言是件坏事。
My boss has a good way to generate apps without his having to write code. He has an automatic programmer (me) write it for him. He uses domain-specific language, and gets a working app. Anything that does the same job would have to be about as smart (or dumb) as that.
When requirements are communicated, a language of symbols is used, whether it is keyboard clicks, mouse clicks, or any other form of input.
If a language maps well onto user concepts and allows very little room for misinterpretation or inconsistencies, then it is a good domain-specific-language.
It is good to try to find better domain-specific-languages.
It is bad to try to sell one if you don't have one.
这是千真万确的——以及neatComponents 无代码开发平台所完成的工作。
看看 www.clearString.com，它是针对这些用户的
David
That is exactly true - and what is accomplished by the neatComponents codeless development platform.
Have a look at www.clearString.com which is targeted at those users
David