I can think of a few. Most of these things could also be done with text-based code, but typically aren't when you're just starting out:
- No set up issues (visual programming is cloud-based)
- Less of a discoverability issue (visual programming shows a lot of things all at once)
- A sense of familiarity (people have seen flow chart like things before)
- It's easier to see the difference between arguments and parameters
Full disclosure: I have almost never seen visual programming languages, but I got the idea that there was no devil's advocate present within you. So here I am ;-) I find it quite easy to think from a beginner's perspective, because in some sense I can't fathom that I know what I know now since I never thought I'd ever know this much in my entire life (and I'm only 31, lol).
> - No set up issues (visual programming is cloud-based)
Cloud-based has nothing to do with visual programming or no-code (you can also do cloud-based editing of conventional code if you desire). Counterexamples: LabVIEW, Simulink.
> - Less of a discoverability issue (visual programming shows a lot of things all at once)
Wasn't "shows a lot of things all at once" actually an argument (marketing pitch) why conventional programming language overwhelm many people who are not programmers, and visual programming languages are "thus" better because charts have a lot less "intellectual density" than computer code?!
> - It's easier to see the difference between arguments and parameters
> Most of these things could also be done with text-based code, but typically aren't when you're just starting out
This means that it all can be done, but isn't. Which means that it's a cultural issue, not a technical issue.
Also, I was under the impression that discussion was about mainstream programming languages and mainstream visual programming languages (of which you said there were none). Here's a workable definition of mainstream: the Stackoverflow top 10. It doesn't have LabVIEW and Simulink.
When you discount niches for visual programming, then you have to do it with text-based programming as well, otherwise the argument isn't fair. I presume that you know this. So I find it peculiar that you don't qualify why you're using languages that aren't (seemingly) remotely mainstream, or why you're not using mainstream examples.
> Wasn't "shows a lot of things all at once" actually an argument (marketing pitch) why conventional programming language overwhelm many people who are not programmers, and visual programming languages are "thus" better because charts have a lot less "intellectual density" than computer code?!
I wouldn't know.
I'm quitting this discussion, the exclamation mark + question mark, "what is actually the difference?" There seems to be no wonder or curiosity from your side. Instead it seems purely adverserial.
- No set up issues (visual programming is cloud-based)
- Less of a discoverability issue (visual programming shows a lot of things all at once)
- A sense of familiarity (people have seen flow chart like things before)
- It's easier to see the difference between arguments and parameters
Full disclosure: I have almost never seen visual programming languages, but I got the idea that there was no devil's advocate present within you. So here I am ;-) I find it quite easy to think from a beginner's perspective, because in some sense I can't fathom that I know what I know now since I never thought I'd ever know this much in my entire life (and I'm only 31, lol).